Comments on: Downshifting On ‘Em Like I Got Gears On Me

By: Jkat

Jkat — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 22:47:01 +0000

the last number i got from my congressman in a bi-yearly newsletter was 913 billion .. that’s including supplementals ..

also a bit OT but just fyi .. let me throw in some old lore .. in viet nam ..the commander of the third marines .. general krulak .. had established a pacified arean in northern I-corps which covered the coastal lowlands .. he had done this by the use of marine forces actually stationed among the villagers in what were called “civic-action-platoons [c.a.p.’s] and raised holy hell when westmorland ordered him to pull out the troops in pacification roles and march them up to khe sahn to interdict the ho chi mihn trail and become “bait” sitting at khe sahn ..

then usmc second lt. and later.. usmc gen’rul jim jones served two tours under krulak as a platoon leader and later as a company commander from early ‘67 to late ‘68 .. and jones later career pretty much tracks to civil-action campaigns .. in bosnia and northern iraq ..

[just an old marine warhorse fillin’ you in on some old inside skinny ..]

By: Spencer Ackerman

Spencer Ackerman — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:10:13 +0000

I’m not sure you understand either what I’ve said or what you’ve said. I didn’t argue anything beyond that there’s an under-investment of the civilian aspects of national security. And if you say that the money isn’t coming out of the defense budget, you should take it up with the NYT’s reporting, or grapple more seriously with your implicit assumption that there aren’t resource constraints facing the federal budget.

@jkat, I was basing my number on the FY 2009 DOD topline, which excludes the Iraq & Afghanistan supplementals. I needed to do so kind of quickly because a) the press conference was about to begin and b) I was going write from the presser to writing the piece that I just filed. I’ll re-check the figure now, thanks.

By: macaquerman

macaquerman — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:34:12 +0000

Slow down. Nobody in his right mind would fail to understand that we need to expend much more of our resources to diplomacy and non-lethal aid.
Beyond that, your argument that those resources should be shifted from military/security budgets is, in the form here presented, short of fact and logical heft.
You’ve many times noted that our military is stretched. Nothing at present indicates that our force requirements or monetary outlay for service personnel will decrease in the next few years.
You talking campaign promises or governance?

By: moxmas

moxmas — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:27:33 +0000

Consider this in the context of Thomas Barnett’s “Leviathan force” (war fighting) versus “Admin force” (runing a country, rebuilding, etc.) and you can see that this doesn’t have to be a military-civilian split, either.

By: Jkat

Jkat — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 17:06:47 +0000

half a tril ?? ’scuse me but the DoD number i’ve read is over 900 billion …

did you miss a gear ??

vroooommmm !!