Just for light reading, here are two recent articles from Jim Lacey at NRO. The first, “A Promise Earned,” eleoquently revisits the retirement arguments.
As well done as that one is, the second, “Moneyball and the Military,” is far more interesting. I recommend it strongly.
I can think of a dozen things off the cuff the AF at least can do to reduce spending without even getting to what most people consider “necessary.” Sadly it’s the important things that get cut first, the lowest paid members, civilian and enlisted; before they even consider reducing pay for higher ups or removing wasted purchases, etc.
The military will not find its “Billey Beanes” because those kinds of people are hardly ever the ones at the top, they do not play the political games required to get there.
Obviously, lacey wrote before the St Louis Cardinals, my home town team, took out the Phillies after a striking end-of-year comeback. So the “moneyball” approach does not always work–especially if Chris Carpenter is uninjured.
But Lacey’s point are spot-on, though vague. He ought to consider some of Zacchaeus’ points from the SWJ blog. Marine air consumes over 75% of their budget, and much of their overhead is subsumed under the Navy budget–so Marines always appear cost-effective (if Marines do the counting). The special ops mission the Marines gave themselves some years ago was, I think, an attempt at attaching themselves to a growth industry in the 1990s, when they looked a bit weak because we had not had an amphbious assault in many years (even the one in the first petroleum war in 1990-91 was a feint). I’m thinking they can drop that mission or develop a standalone capability like the Royal Marines within the special ops community, and remove themselves institutionally–hard to imagine a whole brigade of special ops troops.
The Army has the toughest challenge–how does it maintain a conventional capability when there does not appear to be much use for mechanized forces? “Appear” is the word here–no one expected the 1990-91 war or the Bosnia deployment, both mech-heavy. But who’s next? The other thing the Army needs to get better at is this mission of civil affairs and advising other armies. A robust Green Beret organization, not used for direct action, might work better than our current system.
I hope we maintain a large Navy, though I am not sure what it would look like. I am concerned that only the US can guarantee freedom of the seas, but so much of that effort is protecting Chinese ships carrying exports to the US and Europe–I would rather have us than them responsible for maintaining the proverbial maritime commons. But can we pay for it?
Air Force is an easy target, but we green-suiters (sigh) have to remember it’s not so much mission but Boeing and Lockheed who determine the size and composition of that service. Or at least that’s what it appears to be–I am not being fair, am I?
More later–off to teach.