100,000 stronger? Posted by Derek Chollet

Suzanne has given us a daunting list of questions to deal with, and I’ll go ahead and dive in to try to address one of the tougher ones – the gap between progressives and the military. 

As we’ve argued here before, I think that this is one of the most consequential problems that progressives have to confront over the next few years.  Having been a part of a Democratic presidential campaign, both during the primaries and the general election, this gap was an eye-opener.  Just an anecdote that illustrated this for me: throughout the 2004 campaign, the favorite parlor game for most national security professionals in the Democratic Party was debating who would be Secretary of State, with most choosing between Holbrooke and Biden.  What was amazing is that for the most part, no one talked about who might become Secretary of Defense – and when asked, no one even had any good ideas. 

One should not make too much of beltway gossiping by a bunch of wannabes, but in retrospect, it is illustrative.  Here we are, a nation at war, with nearly 200,000 troops fighting everyday in Iraq and Afghanistan (which by the way, ladies and gentlemen, would still be there today -- although hopefully with more help – if John Kerry had been elected in November) and we were so focused on our “comfort” issues – diplomacy, etc. – that we were overlooking the most important national security job of the new Administration, the 8000 pound gorilla – DoD. 

Which brings me to a big part of the problem: that too many progressives do not see military issues – or “national security issues” – to be as important as foreign policy issues.  In fact, I think that one reason the relentless focus on the flaws of the Bush Administration’s homeland security policies has come up short politically is that most people are left with the impression that we’d rather just have strong defenses at home rather than take the fight to the bad guys overseas. 

But here’s the opportunity.  Because right now we don’t have enough boots to do much more than we’re doing to take the fight abroad.  The military is under tremendous strain, and nearly every military professional that I’ve met, heard or read over the past few months is deeply worried about “breaking” the all-volunteer force.  This is not just bad for handling today’s challenges – Iraq, Afghanistan, etc – but potential future threats, like North Korea, Iran, or a humanitarian crisis. 

So what do we do?  One way to start the discussion would be to read the recent report by the policy group Third Way, which provides an excellent analysis of the problem and offers a big solution: enlarge the Army by 100,000 troops.  This report -- written by Aaron Scholer, a former Lieberman and Kennedy staffer -- is not too wonky and has lots of interesting tidbits (as well as telling quotes from military brass) about the challenges the military is facing.  The idea behind this report, as with all Third Way work, is to introduce these ideas into legislation in the Senate, so stay tuned.

Comments

[DonkeyHawk]

Rumsfeld's vision of a "transformed" military relying on fewer troops is dangerously offbase, and cries for a more forceful Democratic challenge. The war on terrorism is labor intensive, requiring boots on the ground, as Rumsfeld himself suggested in his infamous "hard slog" non-paper. I increasingly suspect that his so-called "transformation" is cover for an ideologically-driven agenda to privatize key components of the military, to destroy public employees unions, and to reduce the government "footprint" in our lives. I suspect also that the recent round of base closings reflect, in part, not only an attempt to create economies of scale, but also an attempt to create facts on the ground in support of Rumsfeld's vision for a leaner, meaner military.

This dogma is in complete discordance with the national secuirty threats we currently face, namely the relatively low-tech but pervasive challenge posed by irrational non-state terrorist actors. American troops will increasingly be called upon to defend agaisnt terrorism in remote corners of the globe, in both warfighting and peacekeeping capacties. Subcontracting en masse these critical functions to either private enterprises or partner countries seriously undercuts our interests and the interests of peace and stability. One of the many assymetrical tactics our terrorist enemy could pursue is not to confront us head-on, but to stretch our forces beyond our current limits. We must preempt this potential vulnerability by adding to our armed force now.

Third Way's endstrength report - as I noted in an earlier posting - is precisely on target in this regard. It represents not only good politics, but utterly sound and urgently needed policy. Democrats suffering from the lingering effects of Vietnam Syndrome should get over it and support a numerically stronger American military now.

[paperwight]

In fact, I think that one reason the relentless focus on the flaws of the Bush Administration’s homeland security policies has come up short politically is that most people are left with the impression that we’d rather just have strong defenses at home rather than take the fight to the bad guys overseas.

OK, let's assume for the moment that taking the fight overseas using our military has net positive effects (not intuitively obvious to me, but it seems to be the base assumption here). Why is it the case that 100K more boots are the right answer for a national security situation which has as its realistic main threats (a) decentralized ideologically motivated semi-criminal syndicates, (b) nuclear nation-states which are either a proliferation threat (Russia) or a nuclear blackmail threat (NK), (c) 1.2 billion Chinese, and (d) peak oil?

I can see where more regular boots might be a good solution for rebuilding failed states, but near as I can tell, we would have had plenty of those for Afghanistan if we hadn't gone haring off after a lie in Iraq. Certainly more boots are a better use of money than a lot of the technological pipe-dreams of the defense contractors. But I don't see where a larger military really helps us with the existing threats in the world.

Open to hearing differently, including challenges to the list of threats.

[paperwight]

First paragraph there should be quoted.

Also, it would be great if you would put a note in the comment dialog to the effect that HTML is disallowed, as all I did was try to italicize the text.

[doc]

Increasing troop strength by 100,000 is a good thing – moving that number up to 200,000 would be even better: there is always the chance that one of the lees stable nation-states will completely unhinge.

However, there are tradeoffs for boots: getting and keeping the troop strength at the aforementioned levels would be a political and logistical nightmare. How are you going to entice that many more people into the service and keep them there?

Assuming you can get the numbers (let’s say Congress and the WH agree to the need for a draft and ignore, again, the general public) how do you budget the additional $2 billion annually needed for the extra troops?

Do we just go ahead and outright kill Amtrak instead of starving it? Or, perhaps another round of tax cuts will trickle down and pay for the troop’s expenses. Or, Medicare is being a pain – how ‘bout we just shut it down?

The question becomes is what (more) are we willing to give up to be able to invade another Iraq and make America safe for democracy?

[DonkeyHawk]

The guns or butter argument is a misleading one. More troops comes with a price, to be sure, but one we must be prepared to pay. If the Administration were truly committed to win this war, it would rollback its tax cuts and big business giveaways. And there are other ways to fill boots then reinstating the draft. Why not a mandatory national service program with the option - but not requirement - for military service, similar to most of the civilized world?

[J.]

Doc and paperweight point out the main flaws of this report, that is to say, it's nice to say that the military is drawn thin, but adding personnel has some dangers inherent in recommending that as the solution.

1 - it assumes that we need to continue the Bush national security strategy of going at it alone in the Middle East and maintaining a high alert in the United States. Where's the option for a reduced overseas footprint and increased reliance on international military partners? We may still need a 582,000 person army but only after a sound national security policy is formed, one that is different than Bush's.

2 - It's going to cost billions. Instead of increasing the deficit or the size of the defense budget, what's the recommendation? Will Democratic politicians support the reduction and elimination of major defense acquisition projects in order to increase the endstrength on a permanent basis? Which ones will will kill? "Foreign Policy In Focus" offered some recommendations to reduce the defense budget, will "Third Way?"

3 - Say Congress agrees - how do we get the end-strength up enough to sustain that level? There have to be significant reforms in the Army's personnel system to change the "up and out" process in place today, and to promise longer stability tours between deployments.

There's a lot missing from this 100K increase argument, and you/we need to justify this more prior to jumping on this bandwagon.

[Tom E]

When World War II started Joe Kennedy, though rich and powerful, insisted his boys serve, even though John F. probably should have been disqualified for back problems. One died and one nearly died in combat.

Members of Congress (including LBJ) resigned and took commissions. College educated males either enlisted or went to work in the federal government.

Last time I heard, less than 1% of Congress, from either side of the aisle, had a close family member in the military (the hypocrisy of conservative chicken hawks is for another day).

These days, most progressive elites, particularly college professors and think tank fellows, probably do not have any relatives in the military and probably do not know a single enlisted person. Most probably do not associate with firemen or cops.

Bleeding and dying is for other people, not for liberals.

It is hard to understand that which you have no connection to.

[paperwight]

So, can anyone else tell if Tom E has a point about the actual topic, or if he just wanted to launch into a dishonest, stereotype-filled smear filled with Club For Growth talking points about who liberals are?

[doc]

...mmmm, wait....no, you're right: utter nonsense unrelated to the topic.

[Cal]

--"Why not a mandatory national service program with the option - but not requirement - for military service, similar to most of the civilized world?"-- Donkeyhawk

You're assuming that the lower classes will continue to risk their lives for a college degree even if they have a safe alternative way to do it. Right now we've upped the incentives considerably and recruitment levels are still down. Give these recruits the further option of national service here at home, and you'd see those levels fall through the floor.

If we want to continue our policy of nation building, we're going to have to start a draft. Otherwise, this policy is unsustainable.

[doc]

…are we, after all, prepared to let young george continue with his World Domination Tour? while wearing the righteous cloaks of Security and Patriotism, this administration has managed to warp the meaning of individual rights in this country and is determined bend or break more (e.g. Patriot Act).

do we really want to continue funding the Adventures of Baron von George? because if we do, it’s my opinion we’re in for a ugly period in this country that will make the current mistreatment of ‘non-combatants’ and the prison scandals seem tame, and the mccarthy era look downright innocent.

i would abstain on troops until it the current administration evokes a clear and concise foreign policy that a) comes clean on the long term commitment needed in iraq and
b) explains, in black and white terms, what this lame duck presidency intends to shackle the next administration to.

[fester]

Why the hell should I get drafted to walk point in Ramadi to a war that I oppose and the draft is the only way that the end strength of the Army or the Marines (through dodging the Army draft) will increase in the next couple of years, as recruitment is dropping like a tab of ectasy at a Chemical Brothers concert --- you are in the paradigm that randomly blowing countries up and not giving a shit makes us more secure and increasing troop strength makes that a higher probability event that we'll do the same thing again. If we are supposed to be formulating a positive, forward reaching national security outlook on the left then let us please not do "We're more competent than Bush, but we agree with the fundamental tenets of blow up the wrong people/country and feel better about ourselves."

[madbad]

Love is the same all over the world! Visitors are from:
Algeria, America, Armenia, Australia, Bahamas, Barbados, Belarus, Canada, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Ethiopia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Holland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Korea, Lebanon, Lithuania, Macau, Macedonia, Malaysia, Mexico, Nepal, New Zealand, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, Pakistan, Philippines, Puerto Rico, Romania, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, Sweden, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emerites, United Kingdom, Vietnam, Yemen & Zimbabwe.
to web sites that we find interesting or helpful!. Where you can see other sites for Dating, Matchmaking, Gifts, Romance, Relationship Advice, & Romantic Places and Travel
http://drugshop.u.yuku.com/blog/post/id/237 buy viagra professional online

[madbad]

http://drugshop.u.yuku.com/blog/post/id/238 buy cialis professional online
Love is the same all over the world! Visitors are from:
Algeria, America, Armenia, Australia, Bahamas, Barbados, Belarus, Canada, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Ethiopia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Holland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Korea, Lebanon, Lithuania, Macau, Macedonia, Malaysia, Mexico, Nepal, New Zealand, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, Pakistan, Philippines, Puerto Rico, Romania, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, Sweden, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emerites, United Kingdom, Vietnam, Yemen & Zimbabwe.
to web sites that we find interesting or helpful!. Where you can see other sites for Dating, Matchmaking, Gifts, Romance, Relationship Advice, & Romantic Places and Travel

[kamzqutsr sihow]

qujaesrmv exwfatc jprm chaoubrp mgur tgeflyj hwrublf

[charmingirl]

Lingerie Wholesale
Sexy Lingerie Wholesale
Leather/PVC Lingerie
Christmas Costume

[gw gold]

I miss the GuildWars Gold because i like to meet it. I want to earn the Guild Wars Gold to make me strong. I want to give my friends a lot of GuildWars money, so i have to try my best to get more and more cheap gw gold to add my stock to have enough money to give my friends.

[dofus kamas]

I hope i can get kamas in low price.
Ibuy dofus kamas for you.
dofus gold is present for you.
Do you like cheap kamas?

[sealonline cegel]

When I have seal cegel, I was just told you, I decide to earnsealonline cegel, that is so interesting.

[knight online gold]

I hope i can get knight gold in low price,
Yesterday i bought knight noah for my friend.

[flyff money]

I like the flyff penya, my brother usually
flyff money for me. I appriciate him.

[aion online kina]

Once I played Aion, I did not know how to get strong, someone told me that you must have aion kina. He gave me some aion online kina.

[Designer Christian Dior Handbags]

like the flyff penya, my brother usually
flyff money for me. I appriciate him.

[yargıc]

Thank you for your sharing.! seslichat seslisohbet

[Ugg Classic Short]

Time is money, and many people pay their debts with it.Do you like the ugg boots?

[trpornizle]

en güzel rokettube videoları,
en muhteşem porn izleme sitesi
en kral rokettube yeri
kaliteli pornoların bulunduğu tek mekan
yabancı sitelerden özenle seçilmiş muhteşem ötesi porno izleme sitesi...

[sikiş]

seni seven oldu komik video haberin olsun video izle gul diye yapiyorum kiyak bilin

[porno]

uzun hava soyluyoruz die porn izlemez mi sandinizi

[sbobet]

I would like to say thanks for the time you took compiling this article. You’ve enlightening for me. I have forwarded this to a friend of mine.