Posted on May 17, 2019
'Hard Choices' and Strategic Insolvency: Where the National Defense Strategy Falls Short
2.28K
27
9
5
5
0
A long-ish but otherwise excellent article about the mis-match between our National Defense Strategy and our budget. One beef I have with it is the authors place a large portion of the blame on "the Pentagon" and 4 star commanders. The US military neither sets strategic policy nor its own budget. IMO, the mismatch is built-in to our system, with the Executive branch making grand sweeping strategy claims in the National Security Strategy (with plenty of over-hype) and the Legislative branch setting the budget (and making sure it is "properly" distributed across districts and states).
'Hard Choices' and Strategic Insolvency: Where the National Defense Strategy Falls Short
Posted from warontherocks.com
Strategy
Budget
Foreign Policy
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
4
4
0
Or how about the military industrial complex that makes sure projects like the F-35 Strike Fighter are spread out through all 50 states to make it that much harder the cut back on the project? Is that what you mean?
(4)
(0)
Col Joseph Lenertz
Yes, exactly what I meant. That is a Congressman prioritizing lobbyists and back-room deals over America.
(2)
(0)
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Good post Sir.
Being a student of history, I am compelled to make comparisons with the past. We entered WWI woefully trained, manned, and equipped. We ramped up hard and fast for WWII, but had similarly allowed the "peacetime" force to depreciate. I won't say Vietnam caught us on our heels, but we were slow to adapt and evolve... the Cold War mentality and strategy being too lumbering and cumbersome to fully deviate from. As we entered the current era, perhaps we're on the reverse side of that coin... trying to balance a world-class force against third-world threats.
Ultimately, I think a portion of the problem stems from the questions always beginning with, "What can we cut from defense to spend elsewhere?" Another part of the problem undoubtedly comes from sacrificing "lower value" projects and assets to make the numbers, as opposed to the huge, largely failed, wasteful "sacred cows" on the radar of Congress and "Big Defense" contractors.
Being a student of history, I am compelled to make comparisons with the past. We entered WWI woefully trained, manned, and equipped. We ramped up hard and fast for WWII, but had similarly allowed the "peacetime" force to depreciate. I won't say Vietnam caught us on our heels, but we were slow to adapt and evolve... the Cold War mentality and strategy being too lumbering and cumbersome to fully deviate from. As we entered the current era, perhaps we're on the reverse side of that coin... trying to balance a world-class force against third-world threats.
Ultimately, I think a portion of the problem stems from the questions always beginning with, "What can we cut from defense to spend elsewhere?" Another part of the problem undoubtedly comes from sacrificing "lower value" projects and assets to make the numbers, as opposed to the huge, largely failed, wasteful "sacred cows" on the radar of Congress and "Big Defense" contractors.
(2)
(0)
Col Joseph Lenertz
Thanks. I put most of the responsibility on Congress. They continue to support those big defense contractors with huge contracts spread over as many states as possible.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google