Posted on 11/13/2017 4:52:06 AM PST by Colonel Kangaroo
Last month, Secretary of Defense James Mattis warned that if Congress doesn’t “remove the defense caps,” he said, “then we’re questioning whether or not America has the ability to survive.” This claim that insufficient increases in Pentagon spending threatens American security is flatly wrong. The real and present danger to our national security is the unecessary use of U.S. military power abroad.
There are two key ways the faulty use of combat power abroad continues to deteriorate our security. The first is the purpose for which the military is used. The preamble to the Constitution explains that the military is intended to “provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.” Further, it decrees that Congress alone has the power to declare war. Today, Congress has fully ceded its responsibilities; the Executive branch has assumed virtually sole discretion for the deployment of the military.
The second and more troubling misuse of the military are the missions they are given to execute. For decades, the armed forces have been routinely employed, not for the “common defense,” but for the benefit of other nations or for purposes with no apparent connection to the security of our country.
The armed forces should only be used to defend American vital national interests—our territorial integrity and prosperity—and only committed when genuine diplomatic efforts have been fully exhausted.
Congress and the American people should debate and decide whether there is a legitimate threat to our vital interests, if the crisis is solvable by military means with clear and attainable objectives, if the resources to succeed are affordable, and if we have a sound strategy to achieve the desired political end state to safely extricate ourselves within a reasonable period of time.
With Congress on the sidelines, the Trump Administration and its two predecessors have egregiously failed on all three points. There is little wonder, then, that the use of the military has not enhanced American security or prosperity.
Presently, the Trump Administration publicly employs the military on active combat missions of one type or another in Niger, Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan, Libya, Djibouti, and Nigeria (there are also scores of classified combat missions for Special Operations Forces about which the public knows nothing). Most of these missions have no relation to U.S. national security whatsoever; others have thread-bare associations at best.
These operations consume tens of billions of dollars each year, cost the lives of U.S. service personnel, and divert resources and manpower away from preparation to defend against potential threats which could pose a legitimate threat to U.S. security.
Moreover, even in operations that were tactically successful, we sometimes have perversely inflicted strategic defeats on U.S. interests. For example, the famed Iraqi surge of 2007 did result in a dramatic decrease in U.S. casualties, but enabled then-Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to systematically purge his army of rival Sunni officers. That led in 2014 to his army disintegrating in the face of ISIS attacks.
In restoring Iraqi sovereignty over ISIS, Baghdad enlisted the use of U.S. air power, ground controllers, and Iranian-backed militias––including the actual use of Iranian troops in Iraq. Iranian military advisors and troops also helped Baghdad crush recent Kurdish attempts at independence ––after the U.S. military helped the Kurds defeat ISIS in Mosul. Iranian influence over Iraq is today pervasive. None of that would have been possible without U.S. military operations since 2003.
The time has come for a major overhaul of American foreign and defense policies. We must abandon nation-building and meddling in the internal affairs of other countries. Our national security objectives in the Middle East can be more effectively accomplished via active and robust intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance efforts.
American affairs abroad should be redirected away from an obsessive attempt to solve problems using lethal combat power and instead focus on expanding U.S. economic opportunity and beneficial trade policies. Core functions of the U.S. government are to defend our population and facilitate a healthy economy. Misusing the military is counter to both objectives.
Daniel Davis, a former Army lieutenant colonel with four combat deployments, is a defense expert at Defense Priorities, the Washington think tank. Follow him @DanielLDavis1
There is an aspect to global defense, which is not being paid attention to by (anyone), with the possible exception of Donald Trump.
I think it is significant.
BOTH PARIES are selling out America. Lots, and lots, and lots of formerly American jobs, are now done in China. China is rapidly advancing.
We are not.
Nobody, anywhere, is saying a thing about that, and I think it is the biggest important thing, which is currently being ignored, by everyone.
All part of the globalists’ plan. Divide (weaken) and conquer. One day, foreign op’s with UN flags on their camo, knocking door to door, taking guns, marking resistors for the gunbirds. (What percentage of today’s grunts do you suppose would resist? How many would go along to get at older white guys? Hmm.)
There is a great malignancy here — social Marxism /progressivism/PC/multiculturalism/OWG (however you name it, same cancer) that must be exorcised. Now.
Did this guy have any objections to obama’s uses of the military?
Somewhere in some dark corners I hear the snickering of the Bushes, Clintons and Obummer while their offshore bank accounts are bulging with blood money.
Few.
Here’s how it worked in China, the troops in Tiananmen Square were from distant provinces.
In the US, White and Latino troops would be sent to Black neighborhoods.
White and Black troops would be sent to Latino neighborhoods.
Black and Latino troops would be sent to White neighborhood.
No one would be asked to disarm someone who ‘looks (or talks) like them’.
The receptions the neighborhoods would give will incentivize the troops to be very diligent in their jobs...
I don’t mind paying taxes for the defense of our borders.
But NOTHING more than that,
If someone gives a damn as to the form of government any other sovereign entity has, what it does to its people or the peoples of another nation or the state of war or peace between any other sovereign entities, they should be free to contribute all the money they want, or go serve and fight in said conflicts.
The only time and purpose of having a single American serviceman outside of our borders is to gather intelligence or pre-empt a direct attack.
Not one cent should we spend for anything else.
We could reduced our actual foreign military operations by one half, without endangering actual U.S. security one bit.
The savings should first go to modernization before going to total defense budget reductions.
The defense department should have two budgets. An expense budget and a capital budget. The capital budget should be the only DOJ budget that adds to any federal deficit. Borrowing for capital expenditures is alright. Borrowing for expenses is not. Yes I know, the same thing should apply to the whole budget, but all we can expect right now is to slice off a bit of that iceberg. It will take many wholesale changes to correct the whole of it, and righting how the DOJ is budgeted would be a good start - operational expenses minus a declared war should not be budget busters contributing to federal deficits; while modernizing (keeping ahead of potential opponents) what the military must use might be.
The republican globalists are going to have their panties in a bunch on this one...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.