so, when you opened up and there was the ipod cradle it imputed it was something really cool just the way it was and that is what the apple 2 does, it imputes that it is a really cool machine. >> watch the rest of the interview on line at the c-span video library. it is what you want when you want. this week on "q & a" author ward caroll editor of military.com, a website that provide news and information to members and veteran families. >> ward caroll, on my way to this interview, i ran into an old navy buddy. i told him i would meet the editor of military.com. he said "they have great videos." >> that is one of our signature things.

>> videos that explode? that's one of the points of military.com? >> it has blossomed into the entire military experience. the suit think about joining are in. it is about beef benefits, palatable exclamations of your benefits. we have comprehensive news coverage. we have a lot of videos and entertainment stuff, the reviews done by actual fighters to see if they are realistic and a myriad of other features. the user home loans, the bills. it is a lot. it is the entire military experience. it is a lot.

>> no. it says in the corner "we have 10 million members." what does that mean? >> a member signs up for free. but basically, they give us their e-mail address and status. that is it. that is all it takes to be a member. since we were founded in 2000, we aggregated. it is a big audience. it is a high impact. >> no. we wanted to talk to you about some of the basics of the military. before we do, where did you start your career? >> i graduated from the naval academy in annapolis. i started my career there. i selected enable navigation. i was goose in "top gun."

he was the guy in the back seat. it was the navy's premier flyer when we started flying it. it was more into a bomber. it was used extensively in the first part of the wars we are involved in now. i had the gift of being a being to fly those for 16 of my 20 years. i had five different extended deployments. i participated in the bosnian war around sarajevo. i did a lot of flying ops over southern iraq. it was a great life. i had a fantastic time. i finished up teaching. that informed what i am doing

now. i was able to have my first novel published while i was there. that came to the attention of the founder. when the time is right, i came here. >> who owns it? >> it is owned by a "monster worldwide." that acquisition happened in 2004 under the auspices of a veteran hiring. we are involved in that now, working closely with the obama administration to get those jobs in this environment. it is a good fit. >> where do you put yourself on the journalism/ working for an industry model? >> we have a pretty solid wall around the journalism part.

all of my guys are based here around d.c. they are all veterans. i have a benefit guy on the west coast. we are very much what some of our executives call athens and sparta. we are sparta. when i put on my news editor hat, i wear several different hats. my team is at the same press conferences as everyone else with the pundits and the various principles. >> we have some video. he is critical of the military.

let's watch. >> you are tied to the purchases of the f-35 and make sure the aircraft is effective. meanwhile, your ambition is to work for the air force as their senior acquisition executive. you are going to ask these aggravating and tough questions, getting to the bottom of the f-35 and aggravate those officials letter in a position to offer you a job. that is not the way it works. you're going to cozy up to the air force. they will give you some information. as much as they think they want you to have. you will be skillful in how you handle that information. you will be convincing. you will land the job at the pentagon. that is how our system of checks and balances breaks down.

>> he was suggesting that if you want to leave capitol hill and go to the pentagon, but we hear people leave the pentagon and go to the industry. who is he? how do you come close to the things he does thing? >> he works for the center of defense. he is a columnist for us. he has been a panelist at the blogging conference and a guest of mine podcast. i do not quarrel with his point of view. before i took the job at military.com, i worked as a civil servant at the v-22 program. as a fleet the guy, i did not have any exposure to the industry's side of it, the defense procurement. i had no exposure.

working in the v-22 which is controversial -- >> explain what it is? >> it is a marine airplane that is half helicopter, half propeller plane. at several crashes during test that was almost canceled and brought to the brink of extinction and then is now in fleet use throughout the marine corps. and the special operations command. they use the v-22 for a lot of things. it is a very expensive airplane. you could look at some of the principals involved on the boeing side and say now they're over there. it is a double edged sword.

you could say this is a machine that is propagating itself. you could say if i am a helicopter pilot or an air force f-15 pilot, i come armed with expertise in terms of what i need that the other side of that process should be able to leverage. i have some examples of that cronyism if you will that is counter-productive. i also know that i have colleagues and former squadron- mates that work for them that are insuring taxpayer dollars and that the machine will meet the requirements needed. the procurement process is convoluted. it is multilayered. we could dedicate a whole series of shows to what is wrong

with defense procurement. i do not quarrel with any point winslow makes. there's always another side to it. >> i am not sure how many civilians are paying attention to this. the f-22, all you have to do is punch it into google and get the stories about a plane that would cost $370 million a piece. >> it depends on who you are talking to. that is a great example. >> how many are in commission? >> there are several hundred.

>> didn't they stop the process of building them? >> they just built the final one, right? it happened last week. >> wasn't their plan to build a lot more? >> yes. it was cut in half on secretary gates' watch. if i am a taxpayer and i asked winslow did we ever need it, the answer is no. all i say is i just look at how often it has been used. the f-22 was not there for the libyan no-fly zone. it was not there for any ops over iraq or afghanistan. some could say it is not fit with this war. we're talking about the next

war. >> i saw a quote from a general saying it was the greatest plane in the history of the world. >> i think it is true. the technology is amazing. >> what do we need it for? >> it is amazing. i do not know that i can answer that. i think the answer is a shrub. >> it was being manufactured in 46 different states. >> that is a different issue. >> it is important. >> that is the other leg of the defense triangle. it is a job peace. that is the long pole in the tent of procured reform. president obama talked about reform. people leave out the one part that is going to make a difference, lawmakers.

go ahead and lose hundreds of jobs in your district. that is how it falls. they joined a strike fighter. then you add other countries. that is the other thing they did to guarantee the success. they got nato partners involved from the get go. it makes it harder to cancel the program. there is international ramifications. >> you could not sell the f-22 to foreigners? >> i do not think so. i do not think they have that in mind. why do we need the f-22? it is better than anything in the world. it has long ranges. it is stealthier.

it can communicate with other f- 22s. it is still a fission. it is maintainable. it is all the stuff you want. >> in your mind, who are we threatened by? who has anything close to this? >> currently, you are talking china and maybe north korea. this is a conventional threat. the taliban does not have an air force. i did the halftime show and making sure they would have rest during intervening years. there is no air threat with the war we have fought since 9/11.

none. there is a surface to air threat. we have not been dodging sams, a service air missile. there have been some limited small arms fire and other shoulder fired missiles. in terms of a big integrated air defense we do not have an opponent. the f-22 is survivable. north korea and china have integrated defenses. if i am the chief a staff of the air force, i would say it is not designed for these wars. it is designed for the big war that might happen. i do not know that is a satisfactory argument with our job market. >> this question came from someone else that suggests they

wanted you to tell us who provides the thread? congress comes and goes. the president's party comes in goes. the generals come and go. who provides the thread when it comes to the future in military? >> the thread? the underwriters would probably be at the feet of the department of defense. i say the threat in some sort of ethereal way. if you look at my time in uniform, it was the cold war. they overlooked the threat of the soviet union. it underwrote our procurement priorities. it was aircraft carriers. it was a huge army base in europe. tanks, conventional forces. since 9/11, we have been

talking more in terms of asymmetric threat and things like mind resistant because that can survive. and they can survive an ied, body armor. they're the things that were not on the table pre-9/11. it is interesting to consider when secretary rumsfeld came into office, he was all about military reform. the army did not like him. he was really targeting the waste in terms of force structure and their priorities. it is ironic that post-9/11 as the bill for the war went up and we were all in bed he was painted as the guy that was

grateful. >> i want to get your reaction to this. >> i would cancel the crusader program. i cannot think of a worse name in this environment. it was an enormous arterial piece that moved anywhere in the world. it is not something that was appropriate for the 21st century and the asymmetric warfare that we're facing. and the opposition to it was just incredible. the entire community, the civilian contractors, the congress. i will give you an example. when i was secretary of defense in the '70s, the bill was 74 pages long. when i came back in the year 2001, if i am not mistaken, the defense authorization bill was 500 pages.

>> what do you hear? >> it was a system. conventional threats. that is what i was talking about in terms of focus. we look at the pop landscape. this is the guy that is lumps in to that charge. whatever he wanted to do was rendered not moot but was overcome by the events post- 9/11. he also had the really legendary arguments about the structure required to take iraq.

he wanted to lowball it. he did lowball it. it played out in ways that the secretary was may be proved the one he was right. >> he said you need a couple hundred thousand. >> he said $300,000. rumsfeld wanted to do it with half or less. it worked for the march to baghdad. >> they say the whole war will cost $60 billion. let me show you a slide we have, because of the war up until now. this is according to the congressional research service that works for capitol hill. >> 800 something billion for iraq, $557 billion for afghanistan.

this has none of the future cost and the health care standpoint. there is a lot of stuff not in those figures. how did we get from $60 billion as a promise to now $1.40 trillion? >> shortsighted thinking. when the top of the invasion of iraq started in late 2002, i was touring as support of my second novel. i was doing a lot of television appearances. when i was talking about afghanistan, they were talking about iraq. when i left iraq in 1998, there is no imminent threat. we knew where every republican guard was. above the 33rd parallel.

there is not a threat. it seemed a little bit contrived to me from my experience that all of a sudden these drums of war. this is the stuff of memoirs. it is what america was led into. if you show up say $1.40 trillion, that is a non-starter. that is just not going to happen in the face of what everybody on the fence and the middle of the aisle was saying. it seems like there is something to what general powell as saying. there's something about this threat does not seem to be valid. he is not a fundamentalist. all of these discussions happened. to make the war happen, it had to be a nice tidy feature. it seemed very clean.

here is another lesson in the natural psyche and cultural literacy about war is messy. >> who pays the bill for military.com? >> we have a number of revenue streams. we have ad services and other third-party organization to provide services. it is primarily advertisement revenue. we have some defense contractor clients. we also have car companies and movie studios, a full range of offerings. >> let me show you a slide of the defense contractors and these figures that you are going to see. we try to fight figures that are accurate. you cannot be sure what is missing. this comes from an organization

called "washingtontechnology.com." the number one contractor this year almost at $11 billion. lockheed martin, then northrop, boeing, you can see the list. when you look at that list, what can you tell us? >> some of those folks make hardware. some provide services. kbr does the logistic piece. they man the chow halls. they make airplanes and other sorts of stuff. boeing makes aerospace. they're on tap to make the next generation tanker. dinecorp does everything to

maintaining airplanes to overseas taking care of things. these numbers are huge, right? this is huge business. the only thing i will say to counter the critics, and i am agnostic, i am not a critic or supporter. i just point to 9/11. what i used to say is you do not get nothing for your money. you get something. let's remind ourselves that on 9/110, the nation faced an unforeseen tragedy. three weeks later we were dropping bombs in and around kabul with planes fielded decades before. during the quiet years, we develop a capability that was leveraged at a time when the

nation needed it. but just remember this money is not as lining the see of combat watching. >> i'm going to play devil's advocate. here are 10 years later. we as the $1.40 trillion. we are locked in there. we cannot get out of afghanistan. do we gain anything from these 10-years? are we winning anything? >> that is hard to answer. i was there last summer in afghanistan. it was a gift to be up close and personal with parts of the military i had never experienced. as an aviator, it is something out totally ignorant of. i remain close friends with some of the guys that literally saved our lives. these are the guys who have

been there four and five times. some are back there again. >> what do they gain when you talk about them off the record and you're not quoting them? what do they think of being over there? >> their view is myopic. at the local level, they are doing work that is successful. they're forging alliances with local governors. they're building schools and resources. at a personal level, it is rewarding work for them. on a macro level, i also had a chance to hang out with general rodriguez and the operation centers in kabul. it vacillates between winning and losing in the 24-hour time frame.

to your point about the infrastructure, and everything seems to be building. there is nothing that is going down there. they are pushing out as you fly away. you see the boundaries getting bigger. same thing down south of kandahar. how do we get out of there? how do stop this momentum? not to mention the investment in american lives we're celebrating the fact that ambassador crocker kicked off a soccer event. it was some sort of a forging of normalcy. it seems a little fragile to me to be candid. i answered that on two levels. if i put my political scientists have, i do not know

if i can say it is definitely a victory. it will be a push at best. if i put a military hat, i am saying the guys who fought there did so with valor. they did right. >> i read in the paper that they quoted the spokesperson at the pentagon, the navy captain, he says he does not vote for a reason. it keeps him tremendously independent and he did not have to were about politics. >> i voted. military individuals are politically motivated. did that disseminated private

capacity. social media has allowed active- duty service members to express political views that i think crossed the line. if i may military blogger, i can say things about the commander-in-chief better almost violations. that line is unclear. i am all comfortable. i was uncomfortable in the last election to the degree of which people were polarized politically. my sense is the honor of the profession is to stay out of that. this is how military people cannot die in vain. you are serving something that

is above your personal outlook. you just answered the call. this is my problem with shin when she was saying that her son had died in vain. i feel very strongly about that. these questions are starting to arise. the president was saying the war is over and people are asking if they died in vain. to my mind, i do not think it is possible for military service men to die in vain in the service of the nation. >> let's throw up another freeze frame on the screen about the size of the military and ask you what is quite to happen with all of this. the marine corps is supposed to be at about 175.

>> that number is going down. listed are some numbers. right now, the defense budget that had not been approved is $450 billion. secretary gates offered up an equal amount to be saved over the next 10-years as a good faith gesture to reduce the deficit. $450 billion over 10-years. as a result of the super committee's inaction, the sequester -- >> what does that mean? >> it means the automatic cuts that are taking effect as a

result of the super committee failure to find $1.20 trillion in savings in the next 10-years. those together equals $1 trillion in defense savings over the next 10 years. that is a quarter of the planned defense budget that will be cut. where does that happen? how these numbers are the first to get affected? they will be reduced by significant amount. let me tell my own personal story. we had some of the cost savings. those that are often reserve status, when they tried to stay on, they were told we do not need you.

you can go home. that kind of thing is already happening. promotion requirements will get more stringent. guys to maybe would have been advanced in previous environment will not this time. it will be tougher to stay in. those who would have liked to make it a career may be forced out. >> he retired after 20 years as a commander. any way to tell a civilian, a commander is? what rank is that? >> it is like a lieutenant colonel in marine corps or army or air force. it is the fifth level from the entry level of being an officer. it is about where you should be at the 20 year mark. >> when would you have gotten a captain's ranking?

>> about the time i got out. stay in or get out our multi faceted. i was then flying airplanes. they allowed me to keep flying airplanes. it was a lot of staff work about not interested in be on that. there's probably no chance for command. it is a competitive thing. >> let me ask about the personal side. when you went to the naval academy, did you have to pay anything to be your education? >> no. your paid to go there. >> what do they give you? >> i think i got the dollars a pay period. i think i made about to enter the dollars a month. it is a pittance. it is a free education.

>> you get a retirement. is there any way to describe how much it is? >> it does have my base pay at 20 years. it is not income. it is an annuity. it is a 401k. it is a good deal. it is a reason to stick it out. i have access to any military installation on the planet. i can shop at the local commissary, the grocery store and the exchange and the department store there. i have military benefits in the form of tricare. this is a controversial topic. is a term mccain is trying to

make the co pay higher. i paid $4 a year -- 400 a year. it covers everything. >> are you married with children? how many children? >> two. >> they are covered. if you go before your wife goes, does she get coverage? >> not medical. she will get half of my retirement. it is something you can pay for. it is an insurance policy. we're talking about the level of benefits for those of a dedicated themselves to the transformation. it is substantial. >> we got this from your website. this is the kind of money that e1, e2, e3.

if you come into the navy as a listed man, you are just getting trained. you make $16,000 a year. if you are the top of a line, you make $65,000. what are we missing? what are you getting besides that? >> if i am in afghanistan, you get hazard pay. >> how much? >> in the case the things i nuclear power, it is probably 1/3 more than that number. then there are elements of locality. you have what is called the basic allowance for housing, depending on where you live regionally. >> does everybody get that? >> in some form or another.

it may leave out the fact that i am unmarried and live on the corridors on base. my housing is taking care of. >> what is the most you can get? >> boston is up there. we have those figures on military.com. it is the basic allowance for housing numbers. those numbers are available publicly. places in texas are cheap. the places and san francisco are high. >> when you are on active duty, how much do you pay for health care? >> nothing. >> you do not pay anything like $100 a month in? >> no. >> does your family get all the health care? >> yes. >> no. what else can you get?

>> all the benefits of being on base. there is a support network of things that you have access to lawyers. you have access to financial experts. there are all kinds of family advocacy. it is an insular community. >> let's say you get out any of only been in for six years. what kind of educational benefits. >> you have the g i bill. for those after 9/11, it is an oppressive legislation championed by senator webb. >> jim webb is a former secretary of the navy. under reagan?

it might have been. he now is a democrat from virginia. he is not going to run again. he is the guy responsible for this. >> i have known since he taught at the naval academy. he was a writer in residence when i was at school. he just published a book. he wrote another while he was there. he wrote a piece about females in the military that was a lightning rod. i have known him for a number of years. we were close to this legislation as it was being distilled. my expert is the author of our benefits resource book worked very closely with his office to

find out the unintended consequences of the legislation. the intent was to give this generation of fighters the same level of benefits that the world war ii generation have a. it is comprehensive. you want to go to harvard. you go. as long as you can get in. we're going to pay a housing site and what you are there. this benefit is fantastic. those who were using it loved it. there were some hiccups in terms of the ability to execute it early on. they have been remedied. they have made an effort to make this work. in some ways, it was forcing it down their throats. it is a great thing done right by those who fought in these wars. >> i want to throw up a screen, officers' salaries.

if you are 01, you are an ensign, $33, 000. jump ahead to the 010 which is a four-star general, $206,112. that is more than a congressman makes. >> this guy, this is the service chief. so, this guy is the ceo of a gigantic organization. compare that salary and skill sets and track record of

success, commanding ships and squadrons, to the civilian sector. that is a joke. that is a lot of money at a glance for public servants. but when you consider what they do and how few of them there are, there are not a lot of them around the pentagon or fleet. it is a fair number. >> go back again. let's say the captain who is one rank above where you got out here to be making a round $110,000. then you get your allowance or hazard pay. >> i would get flight pay. if i am in afghanistan, i get hazardous duty pay. you get different family separation and different things like that. it can be, you know. your medical is paid for. you can add that on as a value. if the money is you probably

make more working on wall street or being a lawyer. you know, you're not hurting i guess. >> as you know, this is part of what people are worried about, a lot of the admirals and the generals and the captains walk out of their jobs here and right into these defense companies. >> but not everybody. >> forget those that do not. that is not my point. you find all these monuments around town paid by boeing and lockheed martin. you see these fund-raisers. it is the same thing of the defense companies. rumsfeld said it cannot even shut it down. >> monuments will be the first thing to go.

they will not be hiring admiral so-and-so unless they need that skill sets. being an officer is going to wane in this environment. those who are hired to work for the defense firms either have such a name recognition that it will have value in terms of the cocktail circuit or they have specific skills and knowledge about a specific program that they are going to be able to use on the corporate side. your average guy, and this is a challenge we are helping tackle. we talk about the 90% that are not in that category. it is a challenge. it is not as easy, even in the office are range, for your average platoon leader to find it in terms of a job and

rewards. >> from your experience, what does the average citizen know about the military? >> little to nothing. eight years ago i the opportunity to play the member guest at cited york. it was a u.s. open venue, old money, old world place. i had a guy asked me. he said you are in the navy. do you live in a hut? he had a gomer pile a sense of what i was. it was perversely basic. this guy of some station, a well-to-do man -- your average

citizen, for all of our exposure, the understanding is very low. ist we're trying to prevent this narrative that is military as victims. i do not know if this is vietnam era guilt or what, but this military as victims narrative is off. >> where does the military as victims come from? >> i think from naivete and inexperience. it is an oliver stone conception. >> isn't the military at the top of respect at the country? >> ok. if you ask your average, even

people that occupy wall street, what do you think about the military? they will say i very much respect them. this is the legacy of the vietnam era. those who lived through that trauma, which is substantial -- the anniversary of woodstock two years ago introduced a lot of this in the circles that i operate in. it was those who served. those scars are very deep about those who served and who did not. thes a cliché to say all druggies went to woodstock and the rest went over there. i was young. my dad was there. he was a career pilot. he served in 1966 and 1967.

>> have you been there? >> vietnam? no. >> we hear the drums beating about china, that china is building up their military and that we have got to beef it up. you hear about these aircraft carriers they are building. at the moment, you tell me difference that they have won and that is not being used. >> it is stock finished. to that point, as we're talking about this year's defense budget and the way it is going to get caught, you have to push go on these machines if you want the capability in the future. the joint strike fighter was approved a long time ago. this thing that is a target for cuts going forward.

>> we talked about the f-22 getting cut. it is expensive. it is behind the schedule. you're talking about the threat. who are we fighting? the defense industry magnate and those on the side of the machine are saying there is a threat. we need them. >> let me ask you about these f- 35. lockheed martin officials said the f-35 will be four times more effective than existing fighters in the air to air combat. you flew the f-14. is that possible that it could be four times more effective? >> sure.

but do you need four times more affected? look at the price point. for the cause of the program, and it will be greater. they're saying it is more surviving because it is cheaper to maintain and sustain. it is more legal because it has all aspects missiles. you can be behind me, which is obnoxious that i have a guy behind me but i can shoot him down. back in the day, you would never do that. it is like shooting a guy in the back. i am talking like an old guy now. i'm sure that math is correct. i am sure that quotient is correct. somebody in the machine has to decide whether four times more effective and because of the programs and jobs it will create.

my brother is involved in this at the command. because the failure, they are working overtime to try to figure out all the options that are at the decision makers disposal. >> go back to the aircraft thing. we talked about it here. we have 11 in united states. two are being built. it looks like china is going to have three by 2015. i do not know whether they will be functioning and out. india will have three by 2014. what is going on over there? >> everybody is sort of trying to be -- >> india has one now. >> i do not know. everyone sees the value of air power, sea based air power.

fixed wing aircraft. >> can the f-35 will do that? >> it was canceled. the utility did not pass muster. if you that at the current job debt, very few times has it done that things. it usually takes off normally. you waste a lot of gas. we were there. they could not want any airplanes. it was a big joke. we did this obnoxious show of force aboard the america. we took a little break.

we launched 50 airplanes in a single cycle including the test pilots. we did some mock battles and landed. those guys were just blown away. we have this new aircraft carrier that we reverse engineered. >> it has had zero utility. for those that want to get involved, we say give it a shot. >> the rest of the world has nine. why do we need 11? >> the doctor has indicated that is the need. we have a presence quotient that each one of these areas of responsibility has done. they are saying that we need to

carry it out of my mission. we are having the same discussion pre-9/11. why do we need aircraft carriers that the soviet union is gone? the first thing we leaned on in the face of we need to start conducting strikes as people are walking into afghanistan, they need air support. where did it come from? naval aviation proved utility in this world. this is the trick with trying to say what requirements are going to be. >> what is the status of the refueling tankers? it went on for 10-years. >> it started with an air force officer going to prison for insider trading and not fair play.

that caused the protesters. there is a big fight between the french company and boeing. boeing and got the award. there in the process of making 18 tankers right now for a fixed price of $42 billion. >> meaning they can not? >> if you exceed that, you will pay for it. boeing will build these for- profit. right now boeing cannot make it for other companies. it is not looking like they will make money currently. that is where the program is. >> we are out of time. ward caroll, editor of military.com, what can people find on your website?

>> every day we have breaking news that is of interest to those with military interests. and for those who want to know what their benefits are in simple terms. we are the place to go. if you want to find guys used to work with, this is the place you go. if you want to see videos, this is the place to go. the news is the most popular on our website followed closely by the videos. >> ward caroll, and it's military.com thank you so much for coming by. >> it is my pleasure. >> for a copy of this program call 1877-662-7726. for free transcripts or to give us your comments, visit us at www.q-and-a.org.

"q & a" are also available as podcasts. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] upcoming guests on a "q&a" include author and reporter glenn kessler, discussing his role as a fact checker. and diane qwest, talked about her columns. today, c-span's live "road to the white house" coverage continues with republican candidate mitt romney at a campaign rally in hudson at noon. then at 7:00 p.m., a john hudson campaign rally in exeter. this morning, former new hampshire senator judd gregg discse