Thought you’d heard every conceivable reason for a Detroit bailout? Think again. From an op-ed by retired General Wesley Clark:

Some economists question the wisdom of Washington’s intervening to help the Big Three, arguing that the automakers should pay the price for their own mistakes or that the market will correct itself. But we must act: aiding the American automobile industry is not only an economic imperative, but also a national security imperative.

So once again, the specter of national security raises its ugly head for the justification of a questionable government action. Clark goes on to cite the success of the Humvee, that four-wheeled star of the Gulf War, as an example of how GM’s innovation helps drive national security. But a close look at some examples closer in time tells a very different story. Nearly all of the designs for the latest generation of armored vehicles are taken from original plans by overseas companies. General Clark is right that American civilian auto production didn’t have to divert much capacity to meet the need for new MRAPs - the sad truth is, the Big Three could have done so even if they wanted to, because their product lines are too clunky and not agile enough to meet that kind of short-range demand.

The hard truth of the matter is that truly innovative ideas which could be “game-changers” on the battlefield have been AWOL from Detroit’s methods of operation for some time now. Clark goes on in his op-ed to harp on the need for new hybrid powerplants and electrical generation capability in the next generation of military vehicles, while conveniently ignoring the fact that nearly all of the innovative work in this field right now is being done outside of the United States. The general seems to believe that a focused military investment in this area will bring a huge leap forward - but it’s been decades since we’ve seen a major leap forward in technology that was led by military investment. These days, the reverse is usually true - civilian technology bounds forward while military capabilities struggle to keep up. The average avionics suite in military aircraft these days is state of the art - for 1995-2000. Army vehicles are now getting the ability to see moving maps and send text messages to one another in real time - about four years after the average suburbanite could do it.

What Clark’s rhetoric is really about is Joe Biden’s infamous three-letter word: J-O-B-S. It’s an open secret that every year, the defense budget becomes less about getting the most capable equipment into servicemembers’ hands, and more about protecting the job base in as many congressional districts as possible. The viability of a defense program is no longer determined by its ability to produce a product on time and in budget, but by how many states it can be spread across to ensure viability. The hysteria over the recent award (later revoked) of the Air Force’s new tanker to EADS Aerospace is a great case in point - while some of the arguments over confusion on requirements and design was well-founded, other arguments were nakedly protectionist in design and had nothing to do with the capabilities of the aircraft itself...

U.S. Rep. Chet Edwards says he’s honored to have been considered for Veteran Affairs secretary but he plans to stay in Congress.

The Waco Democrat said Sunday he told President-elect Barack Obama’s transition team that he’ll continue representing his Texas district, where voters this month re-elected him to a 10th term.

“While it is an honor to have been considered for the position of U.S. Secretary of Veterans Affairs, I believe I can make the most difference for veterans, our district and country by continuing to serve in Congress,” Edwards said in a news release.

Edwards is chairman of the House Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Committee.

“With our nation at war, this is a critical time for our veterans, and I want to remain in a position to push for budgets in Congress that truly honor their service to country,” he said.

He was also on Obama’s short list of potential running mates during the presidential campaign this summer.

Henry VIII's flagship Mary Rose was sunk by a French cannonball and this was covered up by political spin, according to a new academic study.

Until now it was believed a combination of wind and tide pressed Mary Rose over, causing her gun ports to flood in a 16th Century battle in the Solent.

But University of Portsmouth geographer Dominic Fontana said the truth was withheld to maintain the Navy's image.

Mary Rose sank with the loss of more than 400 lives on 19 July 1545.

By claiming the ship was toppled by wind and an incompetent crew, the Navy's supremacy was maintained, Henry VIII's pride remained intact and the French were unable to claim victory, said Dr Fontana.

"The Mary Rose was holed by French gunfire received from an advance party of fast, oar-powered galleys which were heavily armed," he said.

"She would have quickly taken quite a quantity of water into her hull before she manoeuvred to bring a broadside of guns to bear on the attacking French galleys."

That fateful manoeuvre was her undoing he said because the sudden movement of water in the hold caused her to capsize....

...Dr Fontana said: "Mary Rose was hit by French gunfire and despite valiant efforts being made by her crew she capsized just one mile from Southsea Castle from where King Henry VIII was watching.

"Those onshore would not have known anything about flooding in the hull caused by a French hit on the ship and it would have appeared as though she had been caught by a freak gust of wind and blown over."

Mary Rose sank after 34 years of service, fighting in two wars against the French and one against the Spanish.