Congressional appropriators hate program changes or cancellations because it forces them to admit to their constituents that a previously funded project failed. This political pressure creates powerful inertia, forcing the military to continue with suboptimal programs and preventing agile shifts in resource allocation.

A bureaucracy can function like a tumor. It disguises itself from the "immune system" of public accountability by using noble language ("it's for the kids"). It then redirects resources (funding) to ensure its own growth, even if it's harming the larger organism of society.

Frank Kendall was shocked to find that major decisions on new military programs were often made "by the seat of our pants" based on a four-star general's preference. This lack of rigorous, data-driven operational analysis leads to suboptimal investments and wasted billions, a problem he tried to fix by elevating the analysis organization.

Innovation initiatives from entities like the DIU or OSD are destined to fail unless a military service champions the technology and integrates it into its budget. Services have enduring priorities and will not fund external projects long-term, regardless of top-down pressure. You must bring them along culturally.

The US Navy is shrinking despite stated goals to expand against threats like China, largely due to congressional budget dysfunction. "Continuing resolutions" prevent new ship starts and lead to billions in waste, while the Pentagon as a whole fails to spend about $15 billion annually, money which eventually evaporates.

Bureaucracies, like AI models, have pre-programmed "weights" that shape decisions. The DoD is weighted toward its established branches (Army, Navy, etc.). Without a dedicated Cyber Force, cybersecurity is consistently de-prioritized in budgets, promotions, and strategic focus, a vulnerability that AI will amplify.

Government programs often persist despite failure because their complexity is a feature, not a bug. This system prevents average citizens, who are too busy with their lives, from deciphering the waste and holding the "political industrial complex" accountable, thereby benefiting those in power.

A reform-minded leader can create ad-hoc teams and force collaboration between operators and technologists. However, these changes are often temporary. Once the leader departs, the military's established cultural norms and organizational structures, like powerful four-star commands, tend to reassert themselves, erasing the progress.

The defense procurement system was built when technology platforms lasted for decades, prioritizing getting it perfect over getting it fast. This risk-averse model is now a liability in an era of rapid innovation, as it stifles the experimentation and failure necessary for speed.