What's Wrong With the US Defense R&D Budget?

Harperdog writes "Here's an in-depth analysis of what constitutes defense R&D spending and how some of those projects are classified. From the article: 'But much of what transpires in the name of military research and development is not research in the sense that it produces scientific and technical knowledge widely applicable inside and outside the Defense Department. A large part of defense R&D activity revolves around building very expensive gadgets that are often based on unsound technology and frequently fail to perform as required.'"

Re:R&D

[viperidaenz]

Exactly. It R&D primarily revolved around proven, reliable technology then you've just removed both "Research" and "Development" from the acronym. May as well just call it &

Re:The rot and waste aren't new!

[ravenshrike]

But, But, the corporations.

Re:R&D

[mikael]

You get a mod point from me for Funny.

From a geographic viewpoint, the & symbol always looks like "wander round in a circle until you are back where you started" symbol.

Re:The rot and waste aren't new!

[Anonymous Coward]

I recommend crayons. But noooooo, we can't have simple little things like crayons solving problems within a bureaucracy. :)

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion