By Alan Caruba
“Eliminating the terrorists of today
with force will not guarantee protection from the terrorists of tomorrow. We
have to transform the environments that give birth to these movements…It may be
training young people so they can get jobs…it may be working to eliminate
corruption and promote the rule of law…”
The Obama administration proposal that
a jobs program be created for the militants in the Middle East was met with
appropriate derision because what the jihadists need is killing. That’s what
they are doing to Christians, Jews and others in the Middle East and elsewhere.
The quote above is by John Kerry, the
Secretary of State, and to be fair, his February 18 Wall
Street Journal commentary began by saying “The rise of violent extremism
represents the pre-eminent challenge of the young 21st Century. Military force is a rational
and often necessary response to the wanton slaughters of children, mass
kidnappings of schoolgirls, and beheading of innocents. But military force along
won’t achieve victory.”
Kerry is wrong. History as recent as
the mid-20th century is proof
enough that the military defeat of Nazi Germany and the Empire of Japan was the
only thing that ended the threat they represented. He was also wrong when he
told a congressional committee that the world is a safer place these days when
it is clear to anyone it is not.
We are being led by people who live in
some alternative universe where pixie dust and unicorns
exist.
The real question the Obama
administration has to answer is why, since he took office in 2009, has he been
systematically reducing the military power of the United States? By pulling our
troops out of Iraq he created a vacuum filled by the Islamic State (ISIS) that
now threatens the entire Middle East and parts of North Africa. He has since
curtailed plans to pull most of our troops out of Afghanistan.
Out of sight of Americans, however,
the key personnel, the leaders on which our military depends, have been subject
to a purge. General
Paul Vallely (Ret) has warned that “Since Barack Obama has been in the White
House, high ranking military officers have been removed from their positions at
a rate that is absolutely unprecedented,” adding that “He’s intentionally
weakening and gutting our military and reducing us as a superpower, and anyone
in the ranks who disagrees or speaks out is being
purged.”
In late February, 84 former U.S.
government officials, retired U.S. military leaders, and national security
experts sent an open letter to the House and Senate leadership asking them to
work together to end the harm that the Budget Control Act and sequestration is
inflicting on our Armed Forces.
They deemed the trillion dollars of
required defense spending cuts “a grave and growing danger to our national
security…as threats intensify across the globe.” The cuts “are undermining the
readiness of our forces today and investment in the critical capabilities they
will need tomorrow.”
“In the last three years, the Army’s
strength has been cut by nearly 100,000 soldiers. The Navy’s contingency
response force is at one-third the level of what it should be. Less than half of
the Air Force’s combat squadrons are fully ready. Approximately half of the
Marine Corps non-deployed units lack sufficient personnel, equipment, and
training.”
These were facts set forth in the
National Defense Panel’s July 2014 report. It warned that if sequestration takes
effect in fiscal year 2016, the U.S. would be facing an “immediate readiness
crisis.”
This lack of readiness was the subject
of a Wall Street Journal commentary,
“Europe’s Defense Wanes as the Putin Threat Grows” by Ian Birrell, so it is
not just the United States that lacks sufficient troops and weapons in the event
of a war. Birrell noted that “With fewer than 100,000 full-time troops, Great
Britain now has a smaller army than during the mid-19th-century Crimean War.” Other members
of NATO have cut their defense budgets in recent years. He warned that “As we
fight this new Cold War, Western leaders need to relearn the old lessons of
crisis management and deterrence that defeated Mr. Putin’s Soviet
predecessors—and relearn them quickly.”
Recall that Secretary Kerry has gone
on record saying that “climate change” is the greatest threat the U.S. and the
world faces. Little wonder that Chuck Hegel resigned as the former Secretary of
Defense given the pressure he was under from a White House indifferent to the
real problems and threats the U.S. faces.
In 2014 the Pentagon released a
“Climate Change Adaptation Forecast” and any defense funds diverted to this plan
were just that much less than needed for our troops in the field and the real
needs of the U.S. military. Are they supposed to be fighting melting ice bergs
or staying ready for potential military threats from China or
Russia?
An example of the idiotic political
correctness, scarce Pentagon resources are being diverted to a plan to generate
50% of the Navy’s energy needs from “alternative sources” by 2020, including
$3.5 billion for biofuels. You cannot fight a global war if the Navy
cannot swiftly and easily acquire oil to run its ships that are not
nuclear-powered and fly its aircraft.
At the same time, the U.S. has been
reducing its stockpile of nuclear arms. The State Department’s Rose
Gottemoeller, under-secretary for arms control and international security,
recently told a group “The U.S. commitment to achieving the peace and security
of a world without nuclear weapons is unassailable.” She noted that the nation’s
stockpile of active weapons is down 85% from maximum cold war levels, falling to
4,804 in 2013 from a high of 31,255, adding that “We still have more work to
do.”
This completely ignores nuclear
nations like North Korea who have bad intentions toward the U.S. and their
neighbors and it runs completely contrary to the U.S. negotiations with Iran
that would permit it to become a nuclear armed nation.
This is worse than diplomatic schizophrenia; it is a plan for national suicide.
This is worse than diplomatic schizophrenia; it is a plan for national suicide.
Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Vincent Stewart,
director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, recently told Congress that Russia
and China have placed their highest priority on building up and maintaining
strategic nuclear forces.
If you want to know what is wrong
about the entire approach to our nation’s military needs, consider that since
2009 when Obama took office, the Pentagon’s civilian workforce has grown about
7% to almost 750,000, while active-duty military personnel have been cut by
approximately 8%.
At the same time, dozens of
military-equipment and weapons programs have been canceled, including a new Navy
cruiser, a new search-and-rescue helicopter, the F-22 first-generation fighter,
the C-17 transport aircraft, missile defense and the Marine Corps’ Expeditionary
Fighting Vehicle.
We are not prepared to fight a war and
now you know why.
© Alan Caruba, 2015
2 comments:
Considering that American foreign policy is little more than vandalism and murder, the elimination of military is a good thing. As a side benefit, it will be harder to set up the totalitarian police state without it.
Then there is the federal government. All the ills of America proceed from the Constitution itself. Its adoption marked the death of republican government in the US. The elimination of the Constitution and its frankenstein product and a return to the Article of Confederation is much to be desired.
Security today doesnt guarantee protection for tomorrow. A dentist doesnt guarantee against decay in 6 months.
It is an on going process.
Post a Comment