Then counter with Bush, in executing wars on two fronts, is weakening America!
Republicans, Reagan supporters simply cannot have it both ways.
Disconcerting cites supporting the weakening of the U.S. armed forces and why it's so critical below:
As early as March of this year, the NY Times posted an article entitled "The Reach of War; Army Brigade, Long a Symbol of Readiness, Is Stretched Thin." which starts: "
Army officials concede that 82nd Airborne Division is no longer capable of responding to crisis anywhere within 18 hours, measure of toll that four years of war in Iraq and five years in Afghanistan have taken on US military;"
Congr. Ike Skelton (MO), head of House Armed Services Committee, gets it, and is publicly sounding alarms.
Congr. Murtha has for ages.
and it's not just lawmakers. Gen. Peter Pace has been worried since February...
From Salon last December US Readiness Lowest Since Vietnam.
Why it's so important, in the words of The Heritage Foundation , (written prior to the 2000 elections, of course):
"America's national security requirements dictate that the armed forces must be prepared to defeat groups of adversaries in a given war. America, as the sole remaining superpower, has many enemies. Because attacking America or its interests alone would surely end in defeat for a single nation, these enemies are likely to form alliances."
and, from the same article:
"Military readiness is vital because declines in America's military readiness signal to the rest of the world that the United States is not prepared to defend its interests. Therefore, potentially hostile nations will be more likely to lash out against American allies and interests, inevitably leading to U.S. involvement in combat. A high state of military readiness is more likely to deter potentially hostile nations from acting aggressively in regions of vital national interest, thereby preserving peace."
For each serviceman who participates in a military operation, two others are involved in the mission: one who is preparing to take the participant's place, and another who is recovering from having participated and retraining.
Coupled with declining personnel, increased tempo has a devastating effect on readiness. Morale problems stemming from prolonged deployments, equipment that wears out too quickly, and decreased combat training levels heighten when troops are committed to non-combat operations.
Training is a key component of readiness, and frequent missions cause the armed forces to reduce training schedules.
The frequent deployments also take funding away from ongoing expenses. The Department of Defense funds about 80 percent of the cost for operations other than warfare from its "operations and maintenance" accounts, 30 although the funds in the account are supposed to pay for training, fuel, and supplies to forward-deployed troops--all of which are readiness-related.
The stress of frequent and often unexpected deployments is detrimental to the morale of troops and jeopardizes the military's ability to retain high-quality people. Already understaffed units undertake more missions that last longer. (See Table 4.) Some 58 percent of U.S. troops are married, and long deployments often result in strains in family life, leading many to leave the service. The Center for Strategic and International Studies recently concluded that the high tempo of operations had had a significant, negative effect on morale. 32 More recently, the General Accounting Office concluded, "long deployments can adversely affect morale and retention." 33 Increased missions have clearly worn out equipment, reduced training, and decreased morale--all resulting in decreased readiness.
Following is not an endorsement of the upcoming tagged article since I only scanned it and didn't read it deeply, but happened on this in my search and agree wholeheartedly with the assertion: Military readiness could be a winning issue for the Democratic Party, as it was for JFK in 1960.
Now, IMHO, for framing of the issue, here's the nut graf:
To deny that the United States military has readiness problems is to deny the men and women in uniform the respect they deserve. America's military prowess can be restored. To do so, America's leaders must first admit there is a problem. Only then can the President reestablish America's military readiness.