Sustainability Science

This critique seems strange to me.  We are talking about military R&D.  The apparent uproar seems to miss that point.  The critiques from congressmen were apparently absent when the miitary was developing its own private Space Shuttle, it brain imaging initiative, all the robots and "future warrior" tech, ARPANET, etc., etc.  Let alone the congressional penchant to build military hardware that either fails cost benefit projects (such as the military's joint strike fighter) or simply is a joke and outright boondoggle (e.g. almost any new heavy caliber cannon/tank/etc.).  If we are going to critique R&D, then critique ALL R&D.  Critiquing a technology that is certianly in development and fraught with risks but which holds the possibility of huge benefits for society as a whole (not merely war fighting) seems to greatly miss the mark.  I am all for watchdoging and oversight, but this seems a very, very strange target with which to begin that activity.

I would also add that (while it is certainly within his purview) it is unusual to say the least that the former Captain Kiefer who is essentially 80% of this story is also chiming in with unreferenced statistics in the comments section of this section following the story text.  This seems to smack of a personal crusade on his part rather than a reasoned, objective analysis of the issue of government spending.