The current Abrams upgrade program approved by Congress in the NDAA calls for improving gas mileage by decreasing idle times and also calls for improvements to the tank's sights and sensors.Australia splashed out $3.5 billion on 120 specially re-enforced US military tanks and armoured vehicles, causing prominent political reporters to immediately groan and call it ‘a waste’. He told the Associated Press at the time that "if we had our choice, we would use that money in a different way" than spending it on 70-ton Abrams tanks. Congress voted for another $183 million for tanks despite Odierno's argument that the Army was seeking to become a lighter force. We're in good shape and these are additional tanks that we don't need." Our tank fleet is two and a half years old on average now. The tank debate between the Army and Congress goes back to 2012 when Odierno testified that "we don't need the tanks. In some cases, Congress can act out of purely parochial interests." "In some cases, Congress is using its appropriate role of oversight. "It's just one example and it's not unique to this year," Harrison said. However, he noted that it was not unusual for Congress to go against the military's recommendations on the budget. Todd Harrison, a Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments analyst, said it was open to question whether the Army and the Marine Corps needed more tanks on top of the estimated 9,000 already in their inventories. Ray Odierno, the Army chief of staff, to suspend tank production. Turner's office did not respond to several requests for comment on why Congress went against the recommendation of Gen. manufacturer of tanks, is in the district of Rep. The General Dynamics Land Systems plant in Lima, the only U.S. Turner chairs the Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee and will retain that position in the next Congress.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |