I think he's just looking for filler.
I don't think the choice is heads or tails - or rather it can't be. You can try and do the latter - but there are no guarantees - for a number of reasons. You can try and change the former, but at the end of the day with a professional army, you still get what you get (which imho ain't so bad) - if you go to a draft, or partial draft, you change a number of other things (some of which you probably will not figure out until its to late to prevent) - Coming in in 85, I've only been around long enough to have heard the stories by those who were in the the draft Army, and by that alone I would prefer the one we have.So, we're facing two choices. Either we change the way we recruit soldiers (and, by the way, cash bonuses are already about as bountiful as they're going to get), or we change the way we conduct foreign policy—that is, we engage more actively in diplomacy or, if war is unavoidable, we form genuine coalitions to help fight it. Otherwise, unless our most dire and direct interests are at stake, we should forget about fighting at all.
There are advantages to coalition warfare, but unless your partners see it the same as you, there are disadvantages and risks as well. If its our most dire and direct interests - that does not leave much room for anything but stopping the Huns on the beach (unless they infiltrate from Canada- Marc we're watching you guys)
I think the best we can hope for from the FP makers is to go in "eyes wide open" with regard to the potential outcomes, and the role fog, friction and chance play; but even that might be a stretch
I was unaware that GEN Petraeus had been quoted as saying such – in fact I remember just recently he had been accurately quoted by our SWC member from Wired Magazine as saying something to the effect that some folks have to be killed the old fashioned way - and I would argue that there are occasions where its going to be toe-to-toe - and if not tank to tank - then I prefer tank to RPG - what is the old saying - "never bring a knife to a gun fight".Petraeus and officers who think like him are right: We're probably not going to be fighting on the ground, toe-to-toe and tank-to-tank, with the Russian, Chinese, or North Korean armies in the foreseeable future. Yet if the trends continue, our Army might be getting less and less skilled at the "small wars" we're more likely to fight.
I'm with Schmedlap - I think our folks are doing pretty good - whatever their entry level qualifications may have been, they seem to be working out pretty good in the field. Now I do think we can do some more work in the other areas of DOTLMPF to help us win wars - be they small or big - or the missions that come our way in Full Spectrum Operations.
With regard to the personnel side - one thing that might help is greater emphasis by parents, communities and elected leaders to undertake uniformed service - but I would not count on it.
Unpopular Wars are going to happen - any war where our friends, daughters, sons, brothers, fathers go off and die is not going to be popular. Few cultures have ever accepted the sacrifice of their treasure readily - even when they believed the cause was righteous and war was something they knew well - Ex. 120 of the 292 Spartan hoplites Athens took prisoner on Spacteria - about 120 were Spartiates - what we might consider Spartan nobility - but certainly core, pure bloods Lacedaimonians - it changed the political reality mighty quick - the Spartans had a hard time considering their loss in those terms (it might have been different if they'd died in battle) - and they were an oligharcy.
The effect that a prolonged conflict has on a democracy is well known - what is not so well accepted is that while you might enter into war with one outcome in mind, it might not be what happens – in fact it might be radically different then you anticipated. There were an awful lot of Athenians keen to invade a fellow democracy - Sicily - during the Peloponnessian War, even when Nicias told them that Sicily was formidable and would be a hard fight - the Athenians elected to expend more resources - when it was all over, there was a good deal of finger pointing - the people who were eager for war had no real understanding of the possible outcomes, or were unwilling to contemplate them – and in time with a few more bad decisions, so went the Athenian Empire. – as Ken would say - pity.
Kagan's article makes it sound all black and white when there is mostly grey.
Best, Rob
Bookmarks