568
Elon Musk’s DOGE is growing desperate for a “win”
(newrepublic.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2025
568 points (98.1% liked)
politics
31278 readers
2422 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
I mean... If it's about efficiency, wouldn't the military be the first place to audit?
That's how we know it was never about auditing or waste.
We have generals from the military asking for less equipment , and then congress ignores them and rubber stamps the contracts of their doners in the Military Industrial Complex.
https://apnews.com/united-states-government-united-states-congress-4416606e329b4c8baa755aad333d73db
If we want to go after real waste in our spending we need to start forcing the rich to make concessions. This becomes more true every year we allow wealth inequality to continue growing.
This is a common misconception. The military isn't designed to be efficient on the back end. It's designed to win wars efficiently, which is an entirely different thing. The last time they tried to be "efficient" with the military the 101st ended up doing the world's fastest ground and air assault on rations because they didn't have enough food and water. And entire battalions got extremely sick from using local water when they absolutely had to.
Thus sounds like a cherry picked example.
It also happens to be the last time we actually fought on a full scale level. We haven't done anything like 2003 since.
I'm not sure what that proves except that whoever tried it last time sounds like a moron.
George W Bush in 2003. And no, it wasn't just that he was a moron. There were very smart logistics officers working on the problem. It's an inherent problem. The military normally would much rather over supply an area and write it off after the fighting. Because that means there's always a pallet of whatever you need and a plane or helicopter to transport it. Trying to meet the exact needs means that when something gets blown up, it's replacement isn't even in the right region of the planet.
So to be efficient at blowing shit up you have to accept inefficiency in the back end.
When was the last time the US won a war?
Iraq