Budget Constraints at Pentagon Could Affect National Security
The Defense Department starts its yearlong review of strategic priorities
Krepinevich, who has designed war-game scenarios for the U.S. military, warns that the Chinese will be able to launch cyberattacks by exploiting the element of surprise. They might do this by breaking up the U.S. military's communications networks with pre-emptive attacks "to the point where such attacks, or even the threat of such attacks, would raise the costs of U.S. action to prohibitive levels." The Chinese call the military capabilities that accompany this strategic philosophy "assassin's mace," he explained. The Pentagon has repeatedly fended off cyberattacks from Chinese hackers.
Given such technological threats, as well as America's weakened economic position, a major strategy review "comparable to those during the first decade of the Cold War is in order," says Krepinevich. It is one, senior defense officials add, that will also require a similar degree of urgency.
Reader Comments
More money needed to fight the last war
We need to dump yet more money to keep the military in old toys, like us at the start of WW2 keeping battleships that were useless and the Russians having a plethora of worthless tanks. Rumsfeld was right, the military are arrogant, self-serving ninnies!
$$
There doesn't seem to be much reason to our defense/aggression policies. Could probably save megabucks.
1. We have 10,000 nuclear devices, so we need not fear conventional aggression.
2. NATO is a relic of the cold war. Why we commit ourselves to defend innumerable nations who offer nothing for our benefit is perplexing. In the case of conflicts such as Gulf I, we have to form ad hoc alliances anyway since NATO was designed to defend against the no longer existent Soviet Union. I believe George Washington stated this very well about avoiding entangling alliances and forming ad hoc alliances as needed.
3. Our problems with Moslems and terrorism result mostly from AIPAC influence in Congress and the resulting one-sided and unfair policies in the Middle East. More of an influence problem than a military one. George Washington gave great guidance on this subject also.
Washington's Farewell Address 1796
"So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation."
4. The big security problem relating to terrorism is without doubt Washington holding the borders open to bring in millions of illegal aliens along with whoever else wants to get in the country, including thousands of illegals from terrorist countries. I'm a bit dubious about chamberpot immigration also. Many of the new immigrants I've talked to like from Iran, Haiti, and South America hate the US and come here solely to make money.
5. Fighting the unnecessary was in Iraq may have been partly a result of spending too much money on "defense." People who are naturally bullies and control freaks like Cheney and Rumsfeld start thinking in terms of "we're the only world's superpower" and can take over the Middle East in a series of Blitzkrieg attacks.
6. Do we really need to be the "policeman of the world"?
Piece by Piece
obammy is stripping us one section at a time on all ends of our defense. He does this verbally and physically. Our enemies must be in their glory that Bush is gone and we have this windbag of a president doing everything in his power to help them.
God help us.
advertisement
