Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!military
From: haydon@nevada.edu (James P. Willey)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Military Cuts Summary
Message-ID: <13453@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 24 Jan 90 03:35:34 GMT
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Lines: 42
Approved: military@att.att.com

From: James P. Willey <haydon@nevada.edu>

In article <13376@cbnews.ATT.COM> randy@ms.uky.edu (Randy Appleton) writes:
>
>
>From: Randy Appleton <randy@ms.uky.edu>
>
>Here is my summary of the "where is the most cost effective place to cut the
>military" question.  Any ideas out there?
>
>[stuff deleted]
>
>9) Pentagon and Burocracy in General.  Pretty much a "they stink", but 
>people have been saying that for years.  Proably the people who know best
>what to do are in the Pentagon themselves. ARG
>[Off with their heads!]
>

        Cutting down on the volumes of useless reports to Congress would
be a great help.  A news report here in Las Vegas had an interview with some
Pentagon brass (I forget his name) in which he claimed he had to do a study
of and write a report on the feasability of training all the ROTC students
at some college to be helicopter pilots, just because some congressman
wanted to have something to show the voters back home.  If the Congress wants
to do some cutting, fine, but lets start with useless reports to boost the
popularity of congressmen and senators.  You don't have to pay for people to
do the studies and write the reports, people to type then, printer's fees,
not to mention the forests that would be saved by the decrease in paper coming
out of the pentagon.  The congressmen should generally love this last point,
since environmentalists would be pleased.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
James P. Willey                           haydon@arrakis.NEVADA.EDU
Disclaimer:  I'm now employed, but I'm responsible for my employers opinions,
		not vice versa.

Kraneberg, an oldtime historian of [North] American technology, once said-
in the form of a First Law- "Technology is neither positive, negative,
nor neutral."
Indeed.  It is all three.
And omnipresent.
                                         (Robotech)