PNAC letter to Congress on increasing the military

[Danocrat]

Will there be a draft? In January, it appears the PNAC has given Congress and the Administration the order.

Letter to Congress on Increasing U.S. Ground Forces
January 28, 2005


Dear Senator Frist, Senator Reid, Speaker Hastert, and Representative Pelosi:

The United States military is too small for the responsibilities we are asking it to assume. Those responsibilities are real and important. They are not going away. The United States will not and should not become less engaged in the world in the years to come. But our national security, global peace and stability, and the defense and promotion of freedom in the post-9/11 world require a larger military force than we have today. The administration has unfortunately resisted increasing our ground forces to the size needed to meet today's (and tomorrow's) missions and challenges.

So we write to ask you and your colleagues in the legislative branch to take the steps necessary to increase substantially the size of the active duty Army and Marine Corps. While estimates vary about just how large an increase is required, and Congress will make its own determination as to size and structure, it is our judgment that we should aim for an increase in the active duty Army and Marine Corps, together, of at least 25,000 troops each year over the next several years.

There is abundant evidence that the demands of the ongoing missions in the greater Middle East, along with our continuing defense and alliance commitments elsewhere in the world, are close to exhausting current U.S. ground forces. For example, just late last month, Lieutenant General James Helmly, chief of the Army Reserve, reported that "overuse" in Iraq and Afghanistan could be leading to a "broken force." Yet after almost two years in Iraq and almost three years in Afghanistan, it should be evident that our engagement in the greater Middle East is truly, in Condoleezza Rice's term, a "generational commitment." The only way to fulfill the military aspect of this commitment is by increasing the size of the force available to our civilian leadership.

The administration has been reluctant to adapt to this new reality...

http://www.newamericancentury.org/whatsnew.htm

[Mythsaje]

1. A draft

would be, in my opinion, tantamount to political suicide. I find it hard to believe they'd be that stupid.

[Danocrat]

2. Ummmm

They don't have to worry about politics anymore. They're in--forever.

[Mythsaje]

5. I don't think so

Yes, they may be able to manipulate the election process, but they still have to be careful not to do it so obviously that it incites the sleeping masses who like to believe they still have a voice.

[sellitman]

3. The Pukes are dammed if they do...dammed if they don't.

I wonder how many of the names listed as members are ready to send their children and grandchildren?

Not a one I bet.

[Dhalgren]

4. Look for a small (relatively) draft, but called something else.

Some sort of "Wartime Service Requirement" or some such... If they can keep it below 30,000 draftees a year, they will figure it will be small enough not to wake the snoozers...