Raising the Bar at the Pentagon

Lack of accountability within the United States government has proven to be a widely controversial issue during the past few years. However, Defense Secretary Robert Gates ended this trend on June 7 when he fired service secretary Michael W. Wynne and service chief Gen. T. Michael Moseley for systemic problems in securing nuclear weapons and components. The Air Force not only let a B-52 bomber fly across the United States carrying six nuclear-armed cruise missiles but also sent four high-tech nose cone fuses for Minuteman nuclear warheads to Taiwan in place of helicopter batteries. This lack of attention and care on behalf of the Air Force has been an object of scrutiny.
The author raises a valid point as he/she discusses the decline in Air Force standards over the past decade. Nevertheless, Gates's observant, cautious nature has helped him catch numerous errors and mishaps that occur within the Pentagon, thus raising the standards once again. Beginning from the time of the Walter Reed Army Medical Center scandal to this recent controversy, Gates has proven his commitment by weeding out ineffective officials.

The author also introduces another crucial point; the American government, despite having spent great amounts of time and money attempting to secure nuclear arsenals has done just the opposite. As he/she states in this editorial, since 9/11, President Bush established keeping nuclear weapons out of the hands of terrorists and adversaries as a priority. As he/she mentions the “missed message”, he/she emphasizes the fact that attention isn’t focused where it should be and instead government officials have been more preoccupied with issues such as the Iraq war rather than securing sensitive military components.

Moreover, the author’s clearly exemplifies the mishaps within the Air Force/Pentagon by substantiating his/her claims with concrete evidence. He/she successfully expresses his/her concerns regarding standards within the Air Force as well as his/her admiration for Gates’s perceptiveness.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/07/opinion/07sat1.htm