DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Politricks » Madam SECDEF?

Madam SECDEF?

Flournoy.jpg
Senator Clinton isn’t the only female in the hunt for a major cab­i­net posi­tion in the Obama admin­is­tra­tion. Word on the street is that Michelle Flournoy is under strong con­sid­er­a­tion for the Secretary of Defense post.
Ms. Flournoy, a grad­u­ate of Harvard and Oxford, made her bones as a DoD worker bee with the Clinton Administration. She went on to teach at the National Defense University and –in 2007– co-​​founded the respected Center for New American Security. She’s also one of the two prin­ci­pal defense brains assigned to President-​​elect Obama’s tran­si­tion team.
Flournoy knows her busi­ness, has a strong back­ground in both asym­met­ri­cal and tra­di­tional state threats, and seems to believe in a mod­er­ate approach to any with­drawal of American troops from Iraq. She’s expe­ri­enced, qual­i­fied, and her cen­trist posi­tions on defense issues would (seem­ingly) make her a safe choice to head up the DoD.
Unfortunately, Ms. Flournoy’s rea­soned approach to Iraq –with­drawal that takes into con­sid­er­a­tion the effi­cacy of the Iraqi gov­ern­ment and logis­ti­cal real­i­ties– could lock horns with Obama’s ide­o­log­i­cal “with­draw now, regard­less” plan.
Any draw­down that falls short of Obama’s cam­paign promise of expe­dited removal of US troops from the­ater risks upset­ting the eas­ily per­turbed, zeal­ous fac­tion of the Democratic base. That makes Ms. Flournoy almost as polit­i­cally risky as con­tin­u­ing the tenure of cur­rent SECDEF, Robert Gates.
–John Noonan

Share |

November 19th, 2008 | Politricks | 419432 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2008/11/19/madam-secdef/Madam+SECDEF%3F2008-11-20+03%3A56%3A34 You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Stealthy Airlift for Commandos | Thursday — Fire for Effect » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Mang says:
    November 20, 2008 at 12:26 am

    the eas­ily per­turbed, zeal­ous fac­tion of the Democratic base
    Really think so? Democrats didn’t throw a fit when Rahm Emmanuel — an enthu­si­as­tic
    Iraq war hawk — got tapped to be White House chief of staff. He even pushed fel­low party mem­bers around until they agreed with him. I think nom­i­nat­ing Flournoy would actu­ally raise fewer hack­les.
    I also haven’t noticed any Democrats being eas­ily irri­tated zealots yet, they seem to be bask­ing in the glow of the win still…

    Reply
  2. SMSgt Mac says:
    November 20, 2008 at 3:11 am

    Pffft.
    Just what the DoD needs. Another exclu­sive (vs. elite)Ivy League lib­eral arts grad. If Mr. Change is going to keep tap­ping Clinton retreads, he should pick Sheila Widnall. The only Clinton selec­tion that was half worth a da**.
    Color me skeptical.

    Reply
  3. soonergrunt says:
    November 20, 2008 at 8:03 am

    That “Obama’s ide­o­log­i­cal ‘with­draw now, regard­less’ plan” of which you speak–that’s the plan that the major­ity of the American peo­ple want. Have you heard of the American people–the peo­ple who are actu­ally in charge? They’re con­vinced that they were lied to by Bush and his admin­is­tra­tion to get us into this point­less, prof­it­less war while let­ting the peo­ple who actu­ally attacked us get away.
    So the American peo­ple, who want us out of Iraq as soon as pos­si­ble, voted for the can­di­date who promised that instead of the can­di­date who promised to keep us there for a hun­dred years.
    That’s the way the American sys­tem works. Since there is noth­ing in Iraq worth the lives of my sol­diers, and i looked for two extended tours, I’m all for it.

    Reply
  4. JEFF says:
    November 20, 2008 at 9:52 am

    Obama for Change. How is it change when you hire DC insid­ers who have been around the same cor­rupt processes for the past 20+ years. Bush did it too so I’m not say­ing either party is bet­ter. I’m just ready for some­thing to hap­pen that will clean this crap up. I’m tired of these career politicians.

    Reply
  5. marc says:
    November 20, 2008 at 10:00 am

    “Another exclu­sive (vs. elite)Ivy League lib­eral arts grad.” (posted by soon­er­grunt at 8:03am)
    So you are say­ing you would pre­fer some­one with a worse edu­ca­tion to take the post? Perhaps some­one who went to com­mu­nity col­lege or didn’t go at all? I don’t under­stand how over the past few years there has been this huge back­lash against higher edu­ca­tion. So she went to two of the best schools in the world… HANG HER!

    Reply
  6. Wes says:
    November 20, 2008 at 11:13 am

    geedeck: it is no mis-​​representation to say that Obama com­pletely refuses to affirm that the Surge has worked. He refuses to admit he was dead wrong.
    Hubris

    Reply
  7. Camp says:
    November 20, 2008 at 11:36 am

    No mat­ter who the Secretary of Defense might be. I’d have the same ques­tions…
    1. Have they served in the mil­i­tary (Officer or Enlisted)?
    2. Have they ever made deci­sions that placed peo­ple in harms way? If so, how?
    3. What roles have they played in active mil­i­tary oper­a­tions?
    4. What expe­ri­ence do they have expe­ri­ence man­ag­ing defense acqui­si­tion pro­grams?
    5. In their opin­ion, what is the great­est threat to the United States?
    6. What is their opin­ion of the Posse Comitatus Act, and should it be revised?
    I’m sorry, but the vid below is just funny.
    “Interviews With Obama Voters“
    http://​www​.youtube​.com/​w​a​t​c​h​?​v​=​m​m​1​K​O​B​M​g​1Y8

    Reply
  8. Vitor says:
    November 20, 2008 at 12:16 pm

    I can only think “That’s a freakin’ huge chin!”

    Reply
  9. CSI says:
    November 20, 2008 at 2:58 pm

    Political grand­stand­ing from both the Iraqi and U.S. gov­ern­ments, it will be nec­es­sary for the U.S. to main­tain at least 50,000 troops in Iraq for at least another 10 years. Anything less is too dan­ger­ous for Iraq and the region.

    Reply
  10. tomeck says:
    November 20, 2008 at 8:24 pm

    I used to read this blog a year or two ago, though I never got much into the com­ments. What strikes me now that I’ve vis­ited a cou­ple of times again is that the main posts are a lot more par­ti­san than they used to me. Maybe my mem­ory is wrong, but I don’t think things like Obama’s ide­o­log­i­cal “with­draw now, regard­less” would have appeared on this site before.
    It’s too bad, I can get par­ti­san snip­ing on a lot of dif­fer­ent blogs. Here, at least, I’d like to see some real news.

    Reply
  11. sam says:
    November 20, 2008 at 9:01 pm

    “Another exclu­sive (vs. elite)Ivy League lib­eral arts grad.” (posted by soon­er­grunt at 8:03am)
    So you are say­ing you would pre­fer some­one with a worse edu­ca­tion to take the post? Perhaps some­one who went to com­mu­nity col­lege or didn’t go at all? I don’t under­stand how over the past few years there has been this huge back­lash against higher edu­ca­tion. So she went to two of the best schools in the world… HANG HER!
    Posted by: marc at November 20, 2008 10:00 AM“
    Marc, noone is say­ing edu­ca­tion is bad. People really have dif­fer­ent ideas of what higher edu­ca­tion teaches a per­son and some peo­ple can go thru the most expen­sive schools and still come out morons.
    In this I don’t see where she had time to go to two of the best schools in the world after she attended Harvard and Oxford.
    Which schools were they?

    Reply
  12. C4Casey says:
    November 20, 2008 at 9:36 pm

    I’m sorry, but I have a huge prob­lem with peo­ple who have never seen com­bat, or even been in the mil­i­tary, becom­ing SECDEF. I’d really like to see some­one who has at least some mil­i­tary expe­ri­ence, and prefer­ably with some com­mand expe­ri­ence, be tapped for the job.

    Reply
  13. Spike Spiegel says:
    November 21, 2008 at 3:27 am

    Really? A woman for Sec Def? No mil­i­tary expe­ri­ence to speak of? I’m brim­ming with opti­mism. There is a rea­son women are not in com­bat arms. A god­damned good one. Biology has unfairly worked against women with regards to com­bat, both men­tally and phys­i­cally. Anyone who denies that fact is most likely the same type of per­son who thinks 9/​11 wasn’t an act inspired largely by Islam.

    Reply
  14. John Hollis Sr. says:
    November 21, 2008 at 9:57 am

    It is truly painful how divided we as a nation seem to be sit­ting in safe­haven when demo­c­rat and repub­li­can com­man­ders as well as sol­diers daily push aside their lib­eral and con­ser­v­a­tive view­points and pur­sue the mis­sion at hand.
    Politics are absolutely essen­tial. However, we should never allow them to dete­rioate to the cur­rent level, which is a total embar­rass­ment to this coun­try.
    It reminds one of two par­ents argu­ing over whose child should be on the ball team start­ing line up, slash­ing about with hurt­ful remarks when all along the two kids have no prob­lem at all with the situation.

    Reply
  15. Jere Smith says:
    November 21, 2008 at 10:00 am

    I have no prob­lem with a woman being SEC/​DEF, hav­ing said that there are plenty of RETIRED MILITARY women who cold do the job.
    Also remem­ber that Les Aspin who was a SEC/​DEF and sev­eral oth­ers where not for­mer mil­i­tary men either.
    Also I would like to see a Senior NCO as SEC/​DEF there has never been one and I thinnk a per­son who actu­ally lead from the bot­tom of the chain would take a more “Common Sense” approach.

    Reply
  16. Cedric Gifford says:
    November 21, 2008 at 10:17 am

    Her qual­i­fi­ca­tions are heavy on the­ory, light on expe­ri­ence.
    I would pre­fer a SecDef more closely tied to Obama’s with­drawal no pol­icy agenda.

    Reply
  17. Wes says:
    November 21, 2008 at 10:45 am

    Keep Gates as Sec Def!

    Reply
  18. Warpuck says:
    November 21, 2008 at 10:53 am

    If you sur­vive your 1st hour in com­bat, you find you have learned more than you could in 240 hours of class­room study. Forgeting that hour is almost impos­si­ble. Forgeting class­room lessons is easy. Ask some­one with a sil­ver star, if you can get him or her to talk about it.
    Classroom study and sim­u­la­tions can con­di­tion your response, but it does not pre­pare your for the smell, the shock and the real final­ity of mak­ing a mistake.

    Reply
  19. Tim says:
    November 21, 2008 at 11:02 am

    Hey what com­bat expe­ri­ence did Rumy have???
    OH, I guess some con­sider squash to be like war.

    Reply
  20. fargingbastige says:
    November 21, 2008 at 11:28 am

    Ivy League edu­ca­tion and acad­e­mia do not pre­pare any­one for any­thing — other than acad­e­mia. While SECDEF is a far cry from being in the trenches, I would think that some real-​​world expe­ri­ence would be a pre-​​requisite.

    Reply
  21. Larry says:
    November 21, 2008 at 1:17 pm

    Many peo­ple, regard­less of gen­der, have been appointed to posi­tions that they were not really “qual­i­fied” for, and done a great job. That being said, I agree that Harvard and Oxford? Fancy names on that piece of paper that hang on the wall, and not really much to rec­om­mend qual­i­fi­ca­tion.
    Oh…and did you notice?
    “Ms. Flournoy, a grad­u­ate of Harvard and Oxford, made her bones as a DoD worker bee with the Clinton Administration.“
    Where is this famous “change” that Obama promised was com­ing to Washington?
    Did we re-​​elect Clinton when I was not looking?

    Reply
  22. cdr p.w. prawl, usn ret says:
    November 21, 2008 at 2:55 pm

    let’s see now, Madeline albright to the UN, Hillary to state, this lady as secdef; will any jobs be left for white males?

    Reply
  23. chuck says:
    November 21, 2008 at 3:00 pm

    Sounds like another Monica!

    Reply
  24. SSG Yankee Medic says:
    November 21, 2008 at 3:52 pm

    As long as the new Sec Def actu­ally goes out on FACT find­ing mis­sions with a panel of bat­tle hard­ened VETERANS on their staff to IRAQ & AFGN, ANY choice should be an improve­ment on Rumsfeld.
    The cru­cial issues for the next four years:
    1.) Restoring qual­ity VETERAN lead­er­ship with an empha­sis on GROUND oper­a­tions among the Joint Chiefs. Any gen­eral or admi­ral that hasn’t been directly involved with the GWOT within the last THREE years has GOT to be relieved of com­mand !
    2.) Completely over­haul­ing the DoD Procurement System.
    “Lowest Bidder” is due for the ceme­tery. Case in point >
    bat­tle hard­en­ing the HMV cost more than a dif­fer­ent brand new vehi­cle if you through in the orig­i­nal cost AND the up armor process. Lets try the body armor deba­cle for another exam­ple.
    3.) Insuring all mobi­lized, deployed troops get full dig­i­tal med­ical records at their MOBE sites BEFORE leav­ing for a com­bat zone and con­tin­u­ing through their tour of duty.
    4.) Reviewing ALL waste­ful, non-​​productive pro­grams to trim
    the DoD bud­get where it is actu­ally needed. PORK !
    5.) More inter-​​service inte­gra­tion when it comes to vehi­cles.
    The Marines have some great ones, the Army needs to look at where and when they can com­bine con­tracts to save money and lives.

    Reply
  25. Jose says:
    November 21, 2008 at 4:33 pm

    Any com­ments against this poten­tial Sec. of Def. sound like they can easyly apply to Condy Rice…

    Reply
  26. Sean, San Diego CA says:
    November 21, 2008 at 5:14 pm

    Oh boy.…
    Hold on to your hats folks, we’re in for a seri­ous free fall.
    Has any­body noticed all of the Harvard grads???

    Reply
  27. John says:
    November 21, 2008 at 5:47 pm

    Another poster stated Obama’s pol­icy: “you would know he’s in favor of a phased and real­is­tic with­drawal.“
    Gee, that sounds a lot like Bush’ pol­icy, the one that Obama has been decry­ing as “the failed poli­cies of the last eight years.“
    Big change.

    Reply
  28. ELP says:
    November 21, 2008 at 8:32 pm

    Yet more tem­po­rary help that has never worn a uni­form. No thanks.

    Reply
  29. SMSgt Mac says:
    November 24, 2008 at 1:11 am

    Sorry I missed the fun. I’ve been on travel ahead of the hol­i­days and try­ing to wrap up a cap­stone project before Christmas.
    Marc,
    I will bet you dol­lars to donuts I have been going to school longer and earn­ing col­lege credit from more col­leges and uni­ver­si­ties than any­one you know, and that’s not includ­ing hours I CLEP’d to skip most of my fresh­man year, or any Air University and Marine Corps University credit (yes they are accred­ited schools)–Hazards of pur­su­ing engineering/​science degrees while on active duty.
    My beef is with so-​​called elite schools that are really more exclu­sive these days. They trade on their pre­viosly earned pres­tige while in real­ity they’ve degen­er­ated into some kind of post-​​hippy-​​takeover, politically-​​correct, sheep­skin fac­tory with a ready-​​made old-​​boy net­work to help move them along. When I get a stack of resumes and job appli­ca­tions, the “exclu­sive” school guys start at the bot­tom of the stack and have to earn their way up in the inter­view. Occassionally one of these guys comes along that actu­ally does know F=ma AND that you can’t push with a rope AND doesn’t have an over­ar­ch­ing sense of enti­tle­ment — so he or she will get a shot.
    Higher Ed? I LOVE it and will always remain true to my schools. Heck, I plan to teach grad school in my retire­ment.
    GO Seawolveswildcatsaggieseaglesbeaverseagles!!!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

    Most Popular Posts
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • Starship Troopers Meets G.I. Joe
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
    • Dowd's Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Adapting Women to Subs
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Mystery Drone Revealed
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    Recent Comments
    • New Army PEO on the way
      To get our AAA quality shoes at reasonable price, Your...
      nike air force ones
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      "And no, the Koran does not say anything about killing...
      bdwilcox
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to...
      DualityOfMan
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      Fascism? Last time I heard, the fascists promoted christianity. Or,...
      DualityOfMan
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      I see an M16 firing, and I see a 40 mm grenade launcher...
      DualityOfMan
    • Fort Hood Rampage
      "I'd say go read some history on fascist ideology and then compare...
      Sam
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      No. I am not saying a grenade launcher on a rifle is a hoax. I...
      Zandor
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      For someone who trashes all the readers of the blog you sure do...
      a1189
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
      These devices vibrate tissue and bone not just...
      WJS
    • Semi-auto Grenade Thrower
      So are you saying the grenade launcher is a hoax or the M-16?...
      WJS
    Recent Articles
    • Semi-​​auto Grenade Thrower
    • Market for Acoustic Defense Systems Heats Up
    • Fort Hood Rampage
    • Keep it Simple
    • Airbag Defense
    • Dowd’s Bogus Grief Deficit
    • Did Someone Move the Furniture Around?
    • Lockheed Says Sbirs Still on Track For 2010
    • What Does this Handle Do?
    • Adapting Women to Subs
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage