Hot off the press, just released today, invite your attention to report of the statutorily-mandated National Commission on the Future of the Army at following link:
Have not fully read but expect a couple of things:
* It will likely be contentious, both for what it says and does not say and for various factions' assessments of its quality.
* It will generate some degree of workload for the Army Staff as the Chief of Staff and the Secretary decide what they want to do with/about it and how.
Phi Beta Iota: This is a very fine document within very poor parameters. It is a “budget share” document seeking to improve a poor situation within a given budget picture. Unfortunately, its terms of reference do not permit the obvious preliminaries: a grand strategy review without which one cannot seriously reinvent the Army. A proper grand strategy review would probably find that we should close all our bases overseas and return the Army home; that we should turn over our heavy equipment to all host countries, and inform them we will only come to their defense if they invest a minimum of 5% of their annual budget in their own defense; that we should build a 450-ship Navy that is globally distributed and completely refuelable at sea; a long-haul Air Force, and an air-mobile Army that also takes over its own Close Air Support (CAS). The Marines should go back in the box as naval infantry while keeping their air land sea forced entry capability.
Grand Strategy @ Phi Beta Iota