E-mail to a friend.

L,

I've was thinking about your friend when I came across an article in the National Review about military spending. Not that it would have any effect on your friend; in this area, as in most others, lefties don't care about facts since everyone knows that they are the reality based community. But just to give you some talking points if you ever want to go there again.

The article is Defense is Different by Jay Nordlinger in the January 28 issue.

He starts the piece with the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize of 1953 to George C. Marshall for the Marshall Plan, aka, the European Recovery Plan that set about rebuilding Western Europe. He was awarded the prize by C.J. Hambro a Norwegian politician who had organized the escape of the royal family and major government officials to England as the Nazis were conquering the country. This was in 1940 before the fall of France. 

But Hambro knew that General Marshall, then Secretary Of State had been the American Chief of Staff, the boss of Eisenhower, Patton, Bradley, MacArthur and all the rest. That Marshall had said in his Biennial report of 1941:"As an army we are ineffective. Our equipment, modern at the conclusion of the World War, was now, in a large measure obsolescent. In fact, continuous paring of appropriations has reduced the Army virtually to the status of a third rate power. Said Hambro, "The United States had no military strength that could prevent war or even an attack on America." Marshall "saw the total war approaching and his own country powerless." The Army had about 100,000 men under arms, though the newly signed draft would expand that number to 1,500,000. By the end of the war 12,000,000 would serve. Development on tanks had been somnambulent for twenty years, not only did we not have a weapon with a true turret for its main gun; we were still deploying horse cavalry to the Philippines. And in the area of aircraft we had nothing to match the Zero in the Pacific or the Me-109 in Europe. During the Louisiana Maneuvers in the summer of 1941 the troops carried broom sticks for rifles, and the tanks were trucks with "Tank" painted on the side. 

But we did have a whole raft of peace and disarmament treaties.

But that's how it is with America, ramp up when war is upon us, and disarm on the back end. We disarmed so fast after WWII that by 1950 North Korea could attack the south and drive us back over the peninsular to the Pusan Perimeter far to the south. 

When Marshall spoke he said, "My military associates frequently tell me that we Americans have learned our lesson"---about military preparedness, "I completely disagree with this contention and point to the rapid disintegration between 1945 and 1950 of our once vast power for maintaining the peace. As a direct consequence in my opinion, there resulted the brutal invasion of South Korea, which for a time threatened the complete defeat of our hastily arranged forces in the field. I speak of this with deep feeling because in 1939 and again in the early fall of 1950 it suddenly became my duty, my responsibility, to rebuild our national military strength in the very face of the gravest emergencies."

So spoke the man that Churchill called "The Architect of Victory". By the way, that was the last time a military leader would be awarded the Peace Prize.

So where does that put us today? As Buck McKeon (R-Ca.), head of the House Armed services Committee would say "We never think we're going to have to fight another war." But as Trotsky said, "You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you."

The 2012 Budget Control Act slashed $500,000,000,000 from the defense budget. The Sequester, with its 50/50 cuts to defense and entitlements, will result in indiscriminate slashing, though defense is only 19% of the budget, that's another $500,000,000,000. Thus the budget which stands at 4.6% of GDP will shrink to 2.4% in ten years, exactly where it was in 1940. To maintain our standing in the world the number should be 6%.

Under Eisenhower (Beware the Military/Industrial Complex!) and Kennedy (the man who built the Green Berets) the number stood at 10% GDP, and it was 50% of the budget. Under Carter it sank to $4.9% and 23%. The Reagan rebuilding gave us the Military that fought and won Desert Storm (classic heavy forces out maneuvered and destroyed), Afghanistan (Special operators on horseback calling in air strikes on al-Qaeda and the Taliban) and Iraq (again heavy forces going through that country like shit through a goose and then stepping up to destroy an insurgency.)

As Leon Panetta was leaving office he said these cuts will be devastating, leaving us with the smallest ground force since 1940, the smallest navy since 1915, and the smallest air force ever. This also means a lack of training, spare parts and maintenance, and no modernization of systems. I know your friend doesn't care about these things; he's still nostalgic for the Cold War, a war he thought we should have lost. But War takes planning, and as Samuel Pepys noticed it's damn expensive, if you want to win. What does he want, to win or to lose?

JimG33  4/1/2013