With this recent editorial, the New York Times demonstrates once again its fitness only to harm national security through damaging leaks, rather than contribute to coherent debate.
Climbing aboard the Robert Gates bandwagon (as the Secretary has replaced John McCain as Every Democrat's Favorite Republican), the Times lauds many of the Secretary's recently announced directives to cut defense spending, some of which are spot on. Where the Times reveals its facile understanding of the security environment is with this sentence: "Once the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan wind down, the administration must look at trimming troop strength, beginning with the Navy and the Air Force."
So let me get this straight--we plus-ed up land forces over 100K people to deal with Iraq and Afghanistan more effectively, yet when those wars wind down, cuts should begin with the two services that have shrunk in the past ten years? This, even as a chorus of defense experts is taking up the tune of Chinese influence in Asia, and the role of Sea and Air Power in mitigating it?
The Times continues to be the nation's leader in pretentious wedding announcements and stories of the woes of the Hamptons real estate market. National security insight is simply not a forte.
Bryan McGrath
No comments:
Post a Comment