I don't disagree with how horrible a lot of DOD software is, but that's more an artifact of the broken military procurement process combined with the often-childish attitudes people in tech have about working with the military.
There is no reason that one of those jobs can't be "software engineer." There is nothing intrinsic about the military that would make them "amateur coders."
My point is that, having spent a full career in, the "buy vs. build" calculus for military software tends to fall on the side of "buy" for any number of reasons. Those people who aren't "out in the field sending rounds downrange" are still doing plenty of other things in their assigned fields other than writing software. If you think there needs to be a software development career track in uniform, you need to be able to justify it outside the obvious places like CYBERCOM or the NSA.
Yes exactly. I don't have much to add but that was such a great point I wanted to emphasize it.
Also important to consider that as wasteful and expensive as it is to have contractors build stuff, there's at least important market functions in there doing some things and the contractor can be held accountable.