Again, sorry for the duplicate post; I searched and nothing came up.
I agree with the fact that this piece was written by a pantywaisted handwringer of a dem hack... lookat the words he continually uses: "stressed", "strain", "too burdened"... Waaah!
I do however recognize that we are down from 18 divisions (1992) to 10 divisions due to cuts made by the Clinton administration, in its infinite wisdom. Clinton effectively destroyed one of the cornerstones of US military policy for over half a century: being able to fight a war on two fronts at once.
I've been waiting since the 2000 election for our president to expand our military, even in the face of the MSM and the politically correct idea of a "peace dividend" ... You would think that with a war on, control of both the House and Senate, and the China issue, he would have grown a pair by now.
"I do however recognize that we are down from 18 divisions (1992) to 10 divisions due to cuts made by the Clinton administration, in its infinite wisdom. Clinton effectively destroyed one of the cornerstones of US military policy for over half a century: being able to fight a war on two fronts at once."
However, they still maintained that those force levels would support a two theatre conflict. I don't see it.
Now the question remains...do we increase force levels keeping in mind that every 10,000 troops costs One $Billion a year?