The Way Ahead — One Possible Future

Picking up on the earlier comment thread re T.P.M.B (always forget that ‘M’)’s “Star Trek: The Next Generation” banalities, tonight we offer instead a concise, substantive rumination by Douglas Macgregor in AFJ.

MacGregor’s a retired Army colonel, thorn in the side of the Army’s status quo and a decorated Persian Gulf War combat veteran. Many of you probably know he’s put out several books on modern warfare and military reform. That he is at the Straus[sic] Military Reform Project at the Center for Defense Information in Washington, D.C. is purely coincidental.

Washington’s war
. . .

The U.S. needs a new national military strategy, a strategy designed to enhance America’s role as the world’s engine of prosperity, making the American way of life attractive, not threatening, to others. However, for a new, more effective national military strategy to emerge that can rationalize the structure and content of the armed forces for operations in the aftermath of Iraq, both policymakers and the flag officers who command our forces must reorient their thinking to a strategy that exalts economy of force in expeditionary operations and rejects plans to optimize the Army and Marine Corps for any more misguided occupations.

This is a strategy that deliberately limits the commitment of U.S. military resources to attainable goals and objectives consistent with U.S. strategic interests and avoids the kind of open-ended ideological warfare that nearly destroyed Western civilization in the 20th century. . .

In time of peace or war, civilians who command America’s defense establishment must not allow the nation’s military leaders the freedom to develop military strategy in isolation, to define their own programs and priorities, control their own funding lines, and then rate their own effectiveness. Clemenceau’s dictum, “War is too important to be left to the generals,” applies with equal force to the conduct of military operations and, in particular, spending for military modernization.

We suspect that if you read to the close it’ll be clear why we selected this item as of possible interest to you. Pass it along, as they say.

Comments

  1. Comment says

    Condi told an incredible amount of small falsehoods to the 9-11 commission – So you could give her credit for helping to jump start the conspiracy theorists.

  2. Comment says

    President Bush often brags about Condi as one of his accomplishments and the assembled press nods along – Note Bush never says what Condi did – just her mere existance is one of Bush’s accomplishments – This is a very subtle example of Bushian snobbery.

  3. DrLeoStrauss says

    That’s the problem — she was and always has been a mere staffer.

    If one could attach one of those ‘critter cams’ on Cheney’s head to see and hear the world as he walks through it on a daily basis, and then being forced to endure a twittering Condi chirp her way through some mindless verbose superficiality, it is no wonder Cheney doesn’t want to use the Force Choke Hold just to gain some silence. (“Vader! Release her!” . . . “As you wish . . .”).

    There has never been a significant peer voice to gainsay him. Gates isn’t going to fall on his sword either.

  4. Comment says

    Condi Rice says acknowledging the Armenian genocide is unhelpful – But no one seems to care what she says.

  5. Anon says

    Just a side note on Schroeder – he may have a point when he talks about the politcal maturity of the public re foreign policy, but maybe not – Most polls show that the American public has a far more mature and realistic understanding of what is going on in Iraq, than do candidates for President. Do all of the ‘experts’ around Rudy have a mature view? Maybe, but not likely – or not in a healthy way. But this business of talking about maturity is just a distraction from focusing on Bush and a mature Cheney.

  6. Anon says

    That was an interesting essay – we have to read it again before we comment. In the meantime – here is the American Conservative calling Bush an arsonist via an academic cut out who uses too many b-level Bartlett-esque literary allusions for his own good. Tell Pat to hire an editor:
    http://amconmag.com/2007/2007_10_08/feature.html

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

CommentLuv badge