Our military costs a lot of money. If the public believes the military is turning into a well-armed version of our left-wing universities, the public will not support paying for it. And why should it? It is probably more dangerous to wrongly think you have an effective military than to not have a military at all.
The United States spends a great deal of money on its military. But public acquiescence in this funding could collapse if people come to believe that the U.S. military is not a profession based on honor and duty, the purpose of which is to ensure the security of the United States, but rather just another self-interested bureaucracy.
That is not an idle concern. People notice the conspicuous lack of success in our post-9/11 wars in Iraq and especially Afghanistan. They look with horror as the United States executes a disastrous exit from Kabul and wonder about accountability.
At the same time, they are subjected to stories about how the military is making “diversity” rather than military effectiveness its primary goal. Or stressing “climate change.” They rightly wonder if there might be some connection between the Pentagon’s pushing such fads and the lack of military success in recent years. Does the Pentagon even care about military success anymore?
It should, because success on the battlefield is the only justification for a military.
I disagree with the notion that Iraq does not reflect a victory, although it is true that the public oddly doesn't see the war as victorious. But the rest is spot on.
The United States does not need a Peace Corps in battle dress uniforms. The proposed constabulary will not only fail to alleviate the high operational tempo U.S. forces are committed to in operations other than war, it will threaten the Regular Army by creating another force that will compete with the Army for people and resources. The ACF will look like soldiers, but they will not be soldiers. Ultimately, they will be called upon to fight as if they were soldiers. If they are recruited and trained on the basis of their nonviolent mission, the shock of combat will be all the greater.
Our enemies will not care that these are peaceful kids, only that they are wearing American uniforms. We may get lucky and never have to face the body bags coming home, but why risk the pitfalls of the Army Constabulary Force when its benefits are illusory? Raising three new brigades of military police would be a better solution than the ACF. Indeed, the status quo would be better than the ACF "solution." In any case, the debate over the Army's future is hardly settled.
For what it is worth, I advocate an Army focused on fighting and winning our nation's wars -- tired slogan though it may be.
A college campus in military uniforms would be just as worthless.
As Owens in the first link concludes:
The U.S. military is at a crossroads. Its leadership must validate the trust and respect afforded to it by the public, or risk watching that respect evaporate. It must demonstrate that it is an organization committed to success on the battlefield and that it is not a laboratory for anything that does not contribute to military effectiveness.
Fighting and winning our nation's wars must be the most important factor in shaping our military. The public will support and pay for nothing less.
And America can settle for nothing less than that without inviting defeat in theaters more immediately disastrous in its effects than Afghanistan.
