U.S. Military Dangerously Small

National Review Online: U.S. Vulnerable To New Threats Abroad

(National Review Online)  This column was written by the editors of National Review Online.

---

Last week, Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced that the Pentagon was extending the tours of most active-duty Army units in Iraq and Afghanistan. “Our forces are stretched, there’s no question about that,” he said. No kidding. More than five years after September 11, the United States is still fighting wars with a military little changed from September 10.

The extensions were necessary in order to give troops a full year between combat tours. But the military should not have confronted a choice between extending tours and giving troops less than a year at home. President Bush has had half a decade to bring troop numbers to adequate levels. He hasn’t, and Gen. Barry McCaffrey offered a distressing summary of the consequences in his latest assessment of the security conditions in Iraq: “The U.S. Armed Forces cannot sustain the current deployment rate. We will leave [the U.S.] at risk to other threats from new hostile actors if we shatter the capabilities of our undersized and under-resourced Army, Marine, and special operations forces…If we do not aggressively rebuild[,] the capability of the force actually deployed in Iraq will also degrade[,] and we are likely to encounter a disaster.” Blame cannot be pinned entirely on Bush. Bill Clinton, lucky inheritor of the Cold War victory his predecessors won, took an eight-year holiday from reality. Not only did he drastically reduce the manpower of the armed forces, he also neglected the procurement of new weapons, ships, planes, and vehicles. Today’s diminished military reflects this dereliction.

And it is diminished. From 1974 to 1989, the Army had 770,000 to 780,000 active troops (all of them volunteers). Today, we have around 508,000. The Navy had 568 ships in the late 1980s; today it has 276, and its manpower is so reduced that it often has to helicopter sailors from homebound ships to outbound ones in order to keep them staffed. The Air Force’s number of tactical air wings has shrunk from 37 to 20, and the average age of its aircraft is 24 years (as compared with nine years in 1973).

There is disagreement about whether the armed forces should be restored to their Cold War size, but there is consensus among military analysts across the political spectrum that they are too small. Today’s strategic environment requires them to be able to engage in multiple regional wars and peacekeeping operations simultaneously, and still have enough resources left over to deter threats and respond to unforeseen dangers. Suppose, for example, that Kim Jong Il’s regime collapsed tomorrow. The stabilization of the Korean Peninsula — and the attempt to orient it toward Washington rather than Beijing — would probably require the deployment of a large U.S. peacekeeping force. But this would be impossible, given the ongoing commitments in the Middle East that we already struggle to sustain. These commitments will sooner or later end, but the War on Terror will last much longer. Meanwhile, China’s ability to threaten the U.S. will only increase — and so must our ability to deter it.

To Bush’s credit, the Defense Department added 30,000 troops to the Army between 2000 and 2006, and it proposes adding 30,000 more over the next five years. This is a good start, but only that. And it does not even begin to address the procurement crisis. As former senator Jim Talent recently argued in National Review, the military cannot maintain its readiness without raising the procurement budget by at least $30 billion per year over the current level.

What’s lamentable is that President Bush didn’t move immediately after 9/11 to rebuild the military. Now, with Democrats in the majority and his approval ratings at a nadir, it’s much harder politically. In all likelihood, the task will fall on the shoulders of the next president. Mitt Romney has called for adding 100,000 soldiers and boosting defense spending to four percent of GDP. These are sensible proposals, and we hope the other GOP candidates make similar ones.

The Left will raise its usual objection — that the U.S. spends more on defense than countries such-and-such combined (an argument countered easily enough by noting that law enforcement spends more than criminals so-and-so combined). And the increase in defense spending under Bush — which has gone primarily toward operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and has done almost nothing to boost the military’s size and capability — will give the Left an opening to say, “You need even more?”

The answer is yes. History has an annoying tendency not to end, and the world today is an exceptionally dangerous place. There is no excuse for remaining unprepared.

[sclaires]

I have been saying for years that what needs to be done is to reinstate the draft to bolster our armed forces. Sure this is an unpopular proposition but it is needed. Think of all the other countries that have a military draft! At one time this country had the best military around but now it is so bad that it is a LAUGHING STOCK. Every young man should serve some time in the military, be it army, navy, air force, etc. Not only are they taught discipline but they also are serving our country be it in time of peace or war. I have seen first hand the difference between an army with a draft and a volunteer army and there is such a big difference it isn't even funny. This volunteer army that is in existence now is a poor excuse for anything military. The only ones who have pride in wearing the uniform are the National Guard and the Reserve and they are spending more time on active duty then ever before due to the lack of sufficient troops. No, it is way past time to go back to the draft!!

[archangelric]

OK the real deep down base issue is this: our military, as it is currently constructed, exists for a specific purpose; and that is a rapid reaction to threats.

Iraq, is not a rapid reaction; especially after May 2003 declaration of mission accomplished. This is a long term support operation.

By definition, Pres Bush SHOULD have gone back to congress and asked for more troops, supplies, etc. to STAY in Iraq, longer than the rapid reaction. He did not; as that would have required him to admit that this was NOT a reaction to a terrorist threat, that he and Cheney were lying about the troops being home by the end of 2003. In fact they are using State National guard and reserves to supplement the forces that are supposed to be home by now.

There is a procedure in our government, Bush asks for troops for the support operation. If necessary, they (the Pres and Congress) authorize a draft.

This problem, like the others is caused by Bush NOT wanting to be held responsible for his actions. Maybe if he would bother to read the constitution rather than think he is above it ....

[condumism]

Since gun owners in the USA only have the right to own a gun ONLY if they are a part of the militia, then draft all registered gun owners to serve their time in the militia and go fight in Iraq.

[tuppman]

I think that every politician in the USA should have his or her ten closest relatives drafted into the armed services. That would take care of many problems all at the same time.
Just think of it. No more war. No more Red tape for veterans. Soldiers, making $100,000 a year. It would be fantastic. They probably would get government pensions instead of Social Security.

[cheekygal-2009]

Our soldiers should never have been put in harm's way in Iraq as they had nothing to do with 9/11. Bush, Cheney et al should and must be tried for war crimes and found guilty and impeached. They are responsible for the deaths of our innocent soldiers and the innocent Iraqis. Never in the history of the United States has our soldiers been caught in the middle of what is now a civil war. Bush uses God to get his way and God will get his way with judgment against this murdering regime in the U.S. The war profiteering has the blood of our innocents all over it and the vaults of the profiteers flow red with that blood money.

People who don't raise their voices against the treasonous actions of this admin are culpable and history will look upon this time as the time Americans chose to allow a killing field in Iraq and did nothing but follow like sheep.

%u201CA nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.%u201D - Edward R. Murrow

A resolution to avoid an evil is seldom framed till the evil is so far advanced as to make avoidance impossible.Thomas Hardy (1840-1928)

[nyteryder2]

"Offer amnesty to any of the 11 to 20 million illeagal alliens by signing up to join the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marines. If they do 4 years of service in the military, and happen to not get killed, they earn automatic citizenship." Posted by Potterman13 at 10:43 PM : Apr 17, 2007

Please don't let them sign up for the Navy! And I think citizenship should be granted only if they get killed...posthumously.

The rest should be able to save enough money in four years to retire in their home country.

[potterman13]

I have the perfect solution to this "Lack of Troops" crisis. Offer amnesty to any of the 11 to 20 million illeagal alliens (that have snuck into the U.S.) by signing up to join the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marines. If they do 4 years of service in the military, and happen to not get killed, they earn automatic citizenship.

[sportminer]

Ther is a lot to say for a Draft, nothing bad about a youngster doing 2-3 years for their countrey, I am not sure congress will ever let a Draft become real! don't believe the votes are there yet. Iam sure there is going to be a time when a larger Force of some nature is needed, I tend to think Air Power is our best defense if used correctly. Foot Soldiers will always be needed for clean up. Our congress that I see right now would not vote for a Draft.

[sm1nts2escap]

I knew before he was elected because of some bills he proposed to invade our privacy.But it seems funny how only till he starts taking everyones money and soldiers lives for his oil does everyone start to see the man behind the mask.It just goes to show you how people don't care if someone elses lives are efected until theres are.

[bluestardad]

THEY ARE NOT SUPPORTING THE TROOPS!

Did you know that the Bush Administration has been back filling Ranger Units with Three Week trained Troops that go to a Ranger Familiarization course and then are back filled in Ranger Units to fill up the unit strength so they can deploy them! These are not Black Tab Rangers but soldiers that are Pre-Rangers just to fill a Ranger Slot and forced to go into combat without the full Black Tab Training Course! DO ANY OF YOU THINK THIS IS THE BEST WAY TO TRAIN AND COMMIT OUR TROOPS INTO BATTLE? Currently over 25 percent of Ranger companies are not filled by Fully School Trained Rangers!

If you think Americas sacrifice is worth it contact your ELECTED OFFICIAL and tell them http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/

Th
e House Speakers email address: [e-mail]

info@go
p.com Here is the Republican Party email address too!

[e-mail] Here is the Democratic Party email address also!

[might15]

What I find so incredible is that everyone is finally seeing the truth for what it is. Why was this not seen before the election in 2000 or 2004? Did everyone really buy this admins' ***? Why is there no push for a bigger change?

[scottyusa]

Sm1nts2escap
Nah I would not believe the prince of Egypt thing would you? I do have a bridge for sale if you are interested....

[sm1nts2escap]

I think the whole way the us is run is outdated people now are money hungry and lie if we don't want to be screwed than I think we should do away with the whole president politician democratic scam and start a new process that involves a speaker of the homeland that only speaks and doesn't make any decisions all decisions should only be made by the people not bosses.That would truly be a free country cause evrything would be decided by the people and not the people that the people voted on because they always have the option to swindle you.Open your eyes.Blame who you want it will not do you any good.I do think the army should be stronger I would not care if I had to pay war tax cause I know it would help the army but I would want to see reciepts for the money used by the tax.

[sm1nts2escap]

The way I see it.Bush Is a hustler.911 terorist stop terrorism gradually changes to sadam hussien tons of chemical warfare evryone is all scared because they believe anything bush says with a stright face like a bunch of idiots and it's war stop chemical warfare rid of hussien then its more troops rebuild iraq and evryone is like look at the gas prices hunny and it's like keep are troops over there rebuild irag more troops rising gas prices fool every gullable american and meanwhile oil companys and bush are making a killing while our great defenders of the homeland are being swept clean bescause bush is greedy.All of you that thought listened to gbush are gullable idiots you need to stop smoking weed and realize that most of the media is just a con to keep us going on with our daily routine of making and spending money they speak loud voices to you and you listen and belive because they are on tv if a stranger walked up to you and said he was the prince of egypyt would you belive him?

[scottyusa]

If I were in todays army, marines or the guard I would certainly feel that I was being asked to do tours beyond reason. I thank all of you for what you are doing for our country. US Navy 1968 to 1976 and proud of it! Our leaders didn't know how to win a war then and have learned nothing in all that time since.

[talkingham]

This article is absurd. Out military is dangerously large, unless you are planning on invading China, or some other country that doesn't need to get invaded. The founding fathers had a greatg fear of standing armies because they could and would be used by adventurous politicians-- they specifically meant people like Bush, Rummy and Cheney, who have done nothing but squander precious lives and resources since they took office. 911, a product of their neocon goals, was all they needed to screw us to the hilt. Without a draft you will never ahve the size Army they'd like to have, but with a draft it would awaken the political left which is something the Bushies can't afford, might get himself impeached! That's why we need a draft, to keep these chicken hawks from running wild.

[idlepugilist]

Much finger pointin' today, but who's addressing conscription? Recruiters are pressed to meet demands, and the NRO suggests much more.

[navychief8]

FYI: "Rumsfeld wanted only 60,000 troops in the Iraq invasion. [LOL!!!] The Pentagon (General Franks) wanted 400,000. 140,000 went into Iraq. At issue was not the number of troops needed to topple the regime, but the number needed to maintain the peace afterwards. In the days before the invasion the Pentagon had declared that the invasion would last mere weeks, not months. However, the Pentagon maintained that %u201Cboots%u201D were necessary to maintain the peace."
Source: the "Rumsfeld Doctrine"

ajaxrose is just a troll.

Posted by torocaca at 02:42 PM

and in fact, if he had had his way, he would have rolled into Iraq with as few as 18,000 troops to start the war. Imagine that!

[navychief8]

Another definition of FUBAR is when sailors have to be sent ashore to fight like soldiers.


Posted by down-ndirty

I understnad the point you are making. But for the record, on ship or shore, we the Navy will always fight like "sailors". If you get the chance, Google "Navy Riverines". We are doing the same mission we did in vietnam. That being Coastal and inland waterway warfare.

[navychief8]

Rumsfeld & Bush should have learned from the "subject matter expert."

Posted by down-ndirty

Fella, you don't need to school me. I have know the Powell doctrine since GW I. I love the guy and wish he was our President. As I said, Read Cobra II, It is all you need to know. And yes, shame on Rumsfeld. Shame on anyone who wants to make my job harder and more dangerous than it needs to be. For most of the public, we the Military is the nations fire extinguiser. They ignor us and don't care until it is needed or politically popular to support and or bash us. I have been in the game for 18 years and have seen how we have changed. The military of today is the result of what the public wanted after the cold war ended. Yes, it is both Dem and a Reub problem. Thing is, no one has the guts to say we need to do what it takes to make our Military strong again.