<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Defense Transformation in the Post-Rumsfeld Era</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.electricvenom.com/war-bites/defense-transformation-in-the-post-rumsfeld-era/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.electricvenom.com/war-bites/defense-transformation-in-the-post-rumsfeld-era/</link>
	<description>Mid-life crisis, motherhood and martinis</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 23:42:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: rammer</title>
		<link>http://www.electricvenom.com/war-bites/defense-transformation-in-the-post-rumsfeld-era/comment-page-1/#comment-92205</link>
		<dc:creator>rammer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Nov 2008 04:54:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.electricvenom.com/war-bites/defense-transformation-in-the-post-rumsfeld-era/#comment-92205</guid>
		<description>Hmmm, I don&#039;t disagree, but the asymmetric advantage that the American soldier has is the investment in training and material available to him that his opponent lacks.  FCS is not only newer vehicles, it brings with it embedded communications, language translation and persistent sensors that empower the soldier to more quickly understand the situation and share that understanding.  Is this the right thing to invest in to support the future soldier?  I don&#039;t know.  But I&#039;m sure it is better than another stealth fighter, helicopter, rifle, or SOF gee-gaw.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmmm, I don&#8217;t disagree, but the asymmetric advantage that the American soldier has is the investment in training and material available to him that his opponent lacks.  FCS is not only newer vehicles, it brings with it embedded communications, language translation and persistent sensors that empower the soldier to more quickly understand the situation and share that understanding.  Is this the right thing to invest in to support the future soldier?  I don&#8217;t know.  But I&#8217;m sure it is better than another stealth fighter, helicopter, rifle, or SOF gee-gaw.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Prose Before Hos</title>
		<link>http://www.electricvenom.com/war-bites/defense-transformation-in-the-post-rumsfeld-era/comment-page-1/#comment-92173</link>
		<dc:creator>Prose Before Hos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2008 20:52:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.electricvenom.com/war-bites/defense-transformation-in-the-post-rumsfeld-era/#comment-92173</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;That&#8217;s What She Said...&lt;/strong&gt;

I was a step ahead (though I had actually written the post about 2 weeks ago) in writing that the United States, NATO, and Afghani government should pursue diplomatic talks with the Taliban. And lo and behold, in today&#8217;s New York Times, Afghanist...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>That&#8217;s What She Said&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>I was a step ahead (though I had actually written the post about 2 weeks ago) in writing that the United States, NATO, and Afghani government should pursue diplomatic talks with the Taliban. And lo and behold, in today&#8217;s New York Times, Afghanist&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

