A New Theater in the Automaker Bailout Wars: The Military
November 17, 2008
The New York Times has an op-ed by former contender for the Democratic Presidential nomination and former four star general, Wesley Clark, making a case for GM’s survival on national security grounds.
It is a short and easy read, so I recommend anyone engaged or interested in the debate to give it a read.
I am not certain how important a domestic base for the production of our military’s light vehicles may be, but I certainly see Mr. Clark’s logic, even if my lack of direct military experience leaves me at a loss for the details. Mr. Clark’s historical support for the subject is certainly convincing.
I wonder though, is bailing out GM necessary then or just Hummer? Hummer has been languishing on the trading block (for obvious reasons) for months now. Could the company be nationalized? It really did not make sense as a consumer vehicle anyways, but it could still continue as a military producer that makes a faux-military good for ‘that’ consumer set. I’m sure the Federal government could get the marquee for a great price. And I’m sure GM would be happy to have it off of its hands.
And, to show how childish I am, this is actually the part of the article I found most interesting:
“For years the military has sought better sources of electric power in its vehicles — necessary to allow troops to monitor their radios with diesel engines off, to support increasingly high-powered communications technology, and eventually to support electric propulsion and innovative armaments like directed-energy weapons.”
The Army is developing lasers!!! Pew-pew!
… and the cow goes moo
[...] to mention the recent remarks from Wesley Clark stressing GM’s importance for the nation’s [...]
[...] fuel efficient vehicles. One of the reason’s this is essential to the public interest is, as Wesley Clark recently argued, the potential military value of such [...]