Noonish Random Thoughts

With major defense cuts looming, we should expect to see certain things. We should expect the Heritage Foundation to scream very loud about how many Americans will die because the DoD didn't have enough money, and we should expect the Center for American Progress to suggest cutting specific programs randomly as a 'rational' approach to national security. We should also expect the defense lobbying in Washington to hit an all time, war time high.

Loren Thompson has written some really good and really bad ideas down on the Lexington Institute blog. This is one of his all-time worst. Serious question, who besides Loren Thompson seriously believes a rational approach to dealing with serious defense cuts begins with a protection list of programs to protect instead of list of priorities to inform policy?

As I have said many times, there will be two obvious signs that the Department of Defense conducted a legitimate strategic review in response to defense cuts.

1. The strategic review conclusions will favor certain military services over others in both policy priority and funding.
2. The strategic review conclusions will be politically untenable.

If I was advising the Secretary of Defense, I would insure that whatever comes from the strategic review meets those two features as part of the conclusion. I also think it would be a huge mistake to suggest protecting any single program is a priority, because the possibility of cutting any program is leverage that should not be conceded.

I would also have that review completed before the Super Congress panel makes any recommendations regarding future spending cuts. It appears that John Kerry might be the closest thing the DoD has to a defense advocate on this super panel. If you are in uniform, say that out loud a few times until you fully understand exactly where defense funding stands today as a national priority.