Air Force Top Leadership Out

I wonder how quickly the MSM will spin it into a fight between the USAF and the President over Iraq/Iran/Afghanistan?

I have never been impressed by General Moseley and beleive he compares to General McPeak. This is no great loss to the USAF and things can only get better.

http://pentagontv.feedroom.com/?fr_story=FRdamp276047&rf=rss

The announcement. There are other diciplinary actions to follow and an outside team is being brought in to fix the USAF nuclear program...

Ouch.

I can tell you the problem. When the AF got rid of SAC the nuclear side of the mission became unimportant.I call it the revenge of TAC(or ACC as they call it now) There is NO WAY any of this would have happened in the 70's or 80's. Wing commanders were relived for stuff like this automatically.Now they get re-assigned and let the NCO's /Airman take the hit.Little stuff,like changing the name of ICBM sites from LF(launch facility) to MF (missile facility) and LCF (Launch Control Facility) to MAF(Missile Alert facility) is just the tip of the iceberg. Then the powers that be let some Navy propulsion admiral evaluate AF nuclear policies ? I once drove onto the Naval Submarine Base in New London,CT and there was no guard at the gate.When the AF generals start worrying more about SIOP and not what shade the new uniform should be is when the AF might get back on track.Here is an idea-ask some retired SAC IG's and old timers back and let them straighten it out.I'd take a couple weeks vacation from my civilian job to do it.

This sounds wrong to even say, but when the news broke in my office today, we cheered.

And we ARE Air Force!

Jim - please note that ADM Donald is the Director of Navy Nuclear Propulsion and oversees a nuclear program that is nearly as rigorous as nuclear weapons. In fact, we have a number of nuclear weapons on submarines. And while Groton has no nuclear weapons, of all the times I was there, the gate was always manned. Take a drive onto the base at King's Bay or Bangor...different story with armed Marines.

Additionally, at one point, ADM Donald was COMSUBFOR and had responsibility for all the Navy's submarines in an operational capacity.

I believe he was the right guy to conduct this investigation.

And confirmed by DoD press:

BREAKING NEWS: Gates Announces Air Force Leaders' Resignations
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, June 5, 2008 - Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates today announced the resignations of Air Force Secretary Michael W. Wynne and Chief of Staff Gen. T. Michael Moseley following an investigation revealing a decline in the Air Force's nuclear program focus, performance and effective leadership.

Full coverage to follow.

Understand the cheering but new guys wont fix much for long if they dont understand what went wrong (besides demise of SAC). The AF (meaning Mosley and Wynne) went for downsizing force to buy next gen aircraft. That was done but money didn't cover anything but inflation in personnel costs, hardly for the remainder. Downsizing had to include reallocation of manpower from one thing to another. What did munitions manpower do? What did "in-lieu-of" do to available conus manpower? Munitions managers had to be under the gun to be effecient. Co-habitation of non-nuclear and nuclear muns esp missiles for air to ground had to save manhours, close some munitions facilities, build out shops, etc. Right guys to fire but fixes are still above their pay grade. President must fight for bigger share of GDP to restore military budgets to cover what is needed not what can be afforded.

Can we add in that pile of junk from airbus that these guys opted for as a new tanker?

I agree with Jim-retired AF. Saw a similiar comment on Instapundit as well: when the USAF dismantled SAC and gave its responsibilities away, something bad was bound to happen.

On the flipside: The Army was the same way with it's Pershings: even a gum-wrapper on the ground next the launcher was enough to end the careers of several officers in the chain of command. Too extreme?

ACC was supposed to fix the whole "SAC gets everything, Tac gets nothing." scenario. The big strategic mission was getting boucoupe cash, while the army was getting shafted on support.

What we wound up with is an organization that can do neither operation right. The troops are still feeling as though thier airsupport could be better, and the pinnacle of the Strat side of the house is getting ignored too.

Meanwhile, we've gotten two new uniforms, a third one on the way, and a freakin' Cyber command.

Anybody ever read Dick Marchinko(?) on naval nuclear weapons security? He was in a position to know, and his stories made it clear that the Navy was no better in terms of nuclear storage. He might have been just telling a good tale, but his biorgraphy makes clear the Naval brass did not like him because he made them look foolish and criminally negligent.

"[Dick Marchenko's biography] makes clear the Naval brass did not like him because he made them look foolish and criminally negligent"

You mean the biography that he wrote? I can't speak with personal knowledge, but in everything I've read by that fellow the cannon ball is jusr a little too shiny to pass my smell test. Apparently he was a good operator and did some good stuff, but I've heard that he was not above grandstanding and self-promotion. I know, unusual qualities in a SEAL, eh?