I doubt that the NYT is proposing we build the military back up to pre-Clinton levels, but you raise an excellent point. Presidents Clinton and Bush Sr cut the military far down from the 80s levels we enjoyed, but President Bush has yet to build them back. Blaming President Clinton for over-cutting the military was a very fair criticism in 2001. In 2005, not so much.
"Presidents Clinton and Bush Sr cut the military far down from the 80s levels we enjoyed, but President Bush has yet to build them back. Blaming President Clinton for over-cutting the military was a very fair criticism in 2001. In 2005, not so much."
When Bush Senior and Clinton cut the military, remember, we were coming off a cold war mentality where 1/2 million soldiers were going to fight a war on the European continent against overwhelming Communist ground force.
That no longer applies and if it does, Europe is on their own. They can thank themselves for that.
Our military, thanks to Rummy is lighter, faster, better armed and better trained. Our military is no longer geared to fighting in a theater where a million troops from several countries are going to be engaged in a ground war.
The only place this might apply is on the Korean peninsula and the NK attacking SK with even one US soldier on the ground there would be enough to get annihilated with our air and sea power.
We don't need a draft. We need more clearly defined political solutions to accompany the military objectives set by the Generals on the ground. We don't have that because of the media and anti-war politicians.