What's in the QDR?

[SWJED]

23 Jan. Defense News (Not Online) - What's in the QDR?

...Defense News obtained a draft version of the report...

Key changes Rumsfeld will ask lawmakers to enact include:

*Extending F-22 production through 2010 with a multiyear acquisition contract.

*Speeding up Littoral Combat Ship program.

*Increasing special operations forces by 15 percent.

*Establishing a special operations unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) squadron under the Air Force.

*Increasing Navy SEAL and riverine warfare capabilities.

*Increasing psychological operations and civil affairs units by 33 percent, or 3,700 troops...

The QDR suggests force structure changes to help wage “long-duration unconventional warfare, counterterrorism, counterinsurgency, and military support for stabilization and reconstruction efforts.” It reasserts that the military should be able to fight simultaneous wars, but also stresses the need to integrate other U.S. agencies and friendly governments.

The report says conventional ground forces should take on tasks currently performed by special operations forces, and will receive more training in foreign languages and culture. The aim will be to develop “future warriors who will be as proficient in irregular operations, including counterinsurgency and stabilization operations, as they are in high-intensity combat.”...

[Hansmeister]

*Increasing psychological operations and civil affairs units by 33 percent, or 3,700 troops...

Well, I'm certainly happy about that one.

The QDR suggests force structure changes to help wage “long-duration unconventional warfare, counterterrorism, counterinsurgency, and military support for stabilization and reconstruction efforts.” It reasserts that the military should be able to fight simultaneous wars, but also stresses the need to integrate other U.S. agencies and friendly governments.

The report says conventional ground forces should take on tasks currently performed by special operations forces, and will receive more training in foreign languages and culture. The aim will be to develop “future warriors who will be as proficient in irregular operations, including counterinsurgency and stabilization operations, as they are in high-intensity combat.”...

This sounds good, but will the Pentagon really put the needed resources behind it and, more importantly, will Congress acquiescent if that means cutting into procurement?

[Brian B]

This does sound like the right direction for the current, most obvious threat. It looks like these are capabilities we'll need for quite some time to come, based on the nature of the primary threats we're facing. I don't disagree with the direction. Was wondering if anyone had an assessment on our ability to fight a larger scale conflict, for instance if we ever got tangled up with someone like China?