Woodstock Peace Economy: Cartwright: U.S. Force-Sizing, Basing Strategy Need Overhaul

Howard Zinn

"I'm gratified that citizens of Woodstock and its environs are organizing to transform the production of components now used for frightful weapons to peaceful and sustainable purposes. The bucolic setting of Woodstock is such a contrast with the ugliness of arms production. It is especially horrifying that this is taking place in a town whose heritage is peace and harmony. I support your work and hope other people will rally to your campaign to remove this blight from your areas, and perhaps other places in the country where war materials are produced will take up the struggle for a weapons-free, peaceful world. Thank you for what you and your friends are doing."

David Swanson

"Woodstock Peace Economy is providing the necessary answer to the claims of senators and congress members that they cannot shift funding from weapons to human needs because weapons mean jobs. While we know theoretically that non-military investment creates more and better-paying jobs while avoiding all the damage done by unnecessary weaponry, until local communities demand conversion from swords to ploughshares, and local workers demand conversion from swordmakers to ploughmakers, mere facts are not going to get in the way of legislators' loyalties. If other communities follow Woodstock in pursuing a peace economy, we just might all live to tell about it."

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Cartwright: U.S. Force-Sizing, Basing Strategy Need Overhaul

This is an excerpt from:
Defense News, June 4, 2009

Cartwright: U.S. Force-Sizing, Basing Strategy Need Overhaul

By JOHN T. BENNETT

Over the next few years, the U.S. military is likely to become engaged in a number of hot and cold conflicts, each spanning five to 10 years, meaning the Pentagon must "adjust" its decades-old force sizing and basing constructs, says Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs. ...

... Cartwright said he continues to press for development of a new weapon that would allow Washington to take out a fleeting target in a manner of minutes.

The Marine Corps general said he has concluded conventionally armed bombers are "too slow and too intrusive" for many "global strike missions."

Cartwright for several years has advocated for a "prompt global strike" weapon, which would be ultra-fast and fitted with a conventional warhead.

Congress, due largely to worries that other nations, like Russia, would be unable to quickly determine whether an in-flight warhead was nuclear, has refused to fund the program.

Cartwright said even congressional skeptics of the idea realize there is a "military requirement" for such a fast weapon to take out fleeting targets.

The requirements for such a weapon are "starting to emerge," he said."At the low end," a PGS weapon would probably need to be launched and hit a target within "one hour," Cartwright said. "At the high end," the time frame could be as short as "300 milliseconds."

The military might need a "hypersonic" weapon that would travel in the exoatmosphere to take out a limited number of fleeting targets, he said.

Finally, Cartwright told the audience the Pentagon is examining a new concept, called "extended deterrence," something "we're trying to force into the QDR."The idea would be to field a weapon so effective that it would dissuade enemies from carrying out a specific activity, while also "not starting a nuclear arms race" and "giving allies comfort."

The options for an "extended deterrence" capability, he said, are not limited to nuclear-armed weapons.

Full article at http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4123641&c=AME&s=LAN