[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 102 (Thursday, June 19, 2008)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1294-E1295]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     TRIBUTE TO AIR FORCE CHIEF OF STAFF GENERAL MICHAEL T. MOSELEY

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. ROB BISHOP

                                of utah

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, June 19, 2008

  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Madam Speaker, I rise this evening to express my 
appreciation to a fine public servant and military officer, former Air 
Force Chief of Staff General Michael T. Moseley who recently resigned 
on orders from the Secretary of Defense.
  There are a few lingering questions regarding the scope and 
unfortunate timing of this unprecedented decision to dismiss both top 
Air Force leaders at the same time only days before the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) was scheduled to issue its decision in the 
hotly contested $40 billion tanker program. The dismissals also come 
during a time of war and great stresses on Air Force personnel. No one 
will argue that it is not within Secretary Gates' authority to take 
that drastic and unprecedented action even if some of us question 
whether or not it was really the right thing to do given the totality 
of circumstances. Every military and civilian officer knows that they 
serve at the pleasure of the President and that they stand to be 
dismissed for any reason whatsoever. As professional leaders, General 
Moseley and former Secretary Wynne accepted that fact.
  Unfortunately, the entire record of their decades of public service, 
notable achievements, and personal sacrifices for our country, are at 
risk of being lost or pushed aside due to media focus of these recent 
headline-grabbing events. And I regret that a handful of individuals, 
including Members of Congress, may be tempted to seize upon Secretary 
Gates' action to somehow legitimize unrelated claims in areas of 
disagreement with these two Air Force leaders. That would be patently 
unfair and unjust, and I feel an obligation to remind us all of a few 
points.
  With particular regard to General Michael T. Moseley, it would he 
hard to find a more competent and experienced Air Force Chief since the 
service's inception over 60 years ago. Having entered the Air Force in 
1971, he rose quickly through the ranks and his competency as a top F-
15 pilot led him to command responsibilities at the U.S. Air Force 
Fighter Weapons School. In addition to other command responsibilities 
in different parts of the world, General Moseley served as the combat 
Director of Operations for Joint Task Force-Southwest Asia. Like no 
other Air Force Chief in a generation, General Moseley demonstrated 
that he knew how to command air power during combat operations. Between 
2001 and 2004, he served in combat, having commanded coalition air 
forces in Afghanistan and Iraq that employed greater precision and air-
ground coordination than ever before. With advanced post graduate 
degrees as well, he is regarded by many as a military scholar and 
historian, which has given him a level of rounded perspective that has 
benefited the Air Force.
  He served as both Vice-Chief and Chief of the Air Force during very 
tumultuous times in the Air Force. He became Vice Chief in 2004, and 
confronted with extremely challenging budget and personnel cuts posed 
by the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), and still additional cuts 
mandated by the Administration, General Moseley helped to steer the Air 
Force through some very tough times. In so doing, and to his great 
credit, he always put the airmen and their families first. He 
recognized that our Nation unwisely took a ``holiday from history'' in 
the 1990s by delaying and deferring aircraft modernization, and as a 
result, our pilots are having to fly aircraft that are on average 
nearly 40 years old. We have F-15's literally flying apart in the air 
due to age and corrosion. We have F-16s that are nearing the end of 
their service-life. We have 40-year-old tankers, and 50-year-old 
bombers.

[[Page E1295]]

  We have third-world nations that are fielding fighters that are, or 
soon will be--peers to our fourth-generation fighters. At the same 
time, our Administration has not been as committed to recapitalizing 
our fighter fleet with the F-22 and F-35 in the numbers necessary to 
meet validated military requirements as it should be. The Nation has 
taken for granted our traditional air superiority. General Moseley was 
right to have pointed out these vulnerabilities.
  We never know in advance where our next adversary will spring from 
and what the origins of conflict will be. We must be prepared and 
strong across the full spectrum of air based threats, from both 
asymmetric threats and resurgent adversarial nations. General Moseley 
understood this very well.
  Even as military operations continue in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Air 
Force is called upon around-the-clock to undertake combat operations, 
and targeted air strikes, or to fly troops and cargo in and out of 
theatre, or provide intelligence platforms, and the list goes on and 
on.
  Our ground forces have come to rely on our United States Air Force 
mainly because--they're so capable! That's no accident. General Moseley 
understood this, because he was there, actually commanding airmen in 
fighting operations!
  It's because of visionary leaders like General Moseley that the Air 
Force is reliable. It takes almost 20 years to develop, test and field 
a new advanced weapons system like the F-22 and F-35. If we take more 
``holidays from history,'' then we leave our Nation and future 
generations at great risk of falling behind the technology curve.
  In 1938, U.S. defense planners considered the venerable P-51 
(Mustang) fighter aircraft too insignificant for full funding and 
production to replace the more vulnerable P-38 Lightning aircraft. Once 
World War II was underway, it took the U.S. a few years to ramp-up 
production of the P-51 in sufficient numbers so that it could be useful 
in Europe to establish air superiority against the Germans. Back then, 
we were able to recover the shortfall over a few years' time. In these 
modern times with technology development increasing at exponential 
rates throughout many third-world and hostile nations, we no longer 
have that luxury.
  Just like we're learning with the sky-rocketing costs of oil and 
gasoline--even if we were to immediately increase U.S. domestic 
production of oil resources, you can't just turn the spigot on tomorrow 
and have the oil flow. It takes years to do that, just as it does in 
the weapons procurement world. General Moseley understood this and was 
it forceful and persuasive advocate for modernization. This advocacy is 
something which, though he was absolutely correct on the facts and 
merits--earned him criticism when he should have found support.
  General Moseley was also forward-thinking in recognizing the 
seriousness of the military and national security implications posed by 
the growing cyber security threat. His leadership resulted in the 
launching of the Air Force's Cyber command initiative. More than any 
other military department or agency of the federal government, Moseley 
did more than just wring his hands about the threat. He took concrete 
actions to demonstrate that he recognized its seriousness. He should be 
commended for that vision. He oversaw the dramatically-successful and 
historic deployment of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) in combat, and 
also instituted training to help instill a ``warrior ethos'' through 
training in hand-to-hand combat, survival and evasion skills required 
by the types of conflicts demonstrated in Iraq and Afghanistan.
  I am proud of General Moseley--that his sense of responsibility to 
the Air Force's overall mission led him to voice legitimate concerns on 
matters like the serious deficiencies in Aircraft Modernization with 
Congress, even at risk of his career. To me, that is real integrity. 
When we have hearings on the Armed Services Committee, what we're after 
is the real truth--unvarnished and unblinking. We're not looking for 
the sanitized version of the truth.
  The Secretary of Defense cited a failure of leadership within the Air 
Force with regard to its nuclear mission. Those are, indeed, serious 
charges and certainly corrections within the Air Force as to procedures 
must continue to be made. But I want to point out that many of the 
systemic problems in the nuclear area mentioned in the Admiral's report 
are not General Moseley or Secretary Wynne's fault. The Department of 
Defense and the Administration share in the responsibility for the 
impacts of both Budget cuts and BRAC mandated targets of the past. 
Those cuts clearly de-funded and de-emphasized nuclear matters. Cuts in 
the ICBM modernization budgets and programs that were not necessarily 
the Air Force's preferred choice have also taken a toll in these recent 
incidents, and those budget cut impacts must also he acknowledged and 
corrected by this and future Secretaries if we are truly going to 
address shortfalls in nuclear surety matters. I know first-hand because 
during my six years in Congress, I have had to request that funding be 
added to the budget to cover documented shortfalls in Minuteman III 
modernization programs.
  In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I want to conclude by thanking General 
Michael Moseley and Secretary Mike Wynne for their dedicated public 
service to our nation and our fighting men and women. From where I sit 
as a Member of the Armed Services Committee, I believe that both of 
these Air Force leaders can hold their heads high. I believe they are 
men of great personal integrity. I wish them both well in their future 
endeavors.

                          ____________________