President Clinton's Military: Part One - Fighting Force or Social Planners

By C. Grady Drago

1999It is no accident that Americans enjoy opportunities and a degree of liberty only dreamed of in most foreign nations. It has taken many years, many tough decisions by past Presidents and Congresses, and sacrifices by many young American's to secure these blessings. Now, today, has the blood of so many of America's youth been spilled for naught? Today, we face new and unique threats to our national security and to the sovereignty of the U.S. brought about by numerous direct and indirect actions of our own President. Perhaps now more than ever we must insure a strong, strategically ready, and well trained and equipped military in order for America to retain its political and economic position in the world community. Some of the threatening actions taken by President Clinton include: 1) terminating the Defense Department's traditional veto power over exporting items that they think will threaten national security (as was the case with the recent missile guidance systems sold to China - and hence the India/Pakistan standoff, and the untold number of missiles now aimed at the U.S. with improved technology); 2) enhancing the ability of North Korea to develop nuclear weapons; 3) the potential devastating damage to the U.S. economy and military readiness due to curtailed energy use, along with the deferral of domestic powers to foreign nations required in Clinton's now rejected and discredited Kyoto Treaty on Global Warming (he said he would implement the treaty even though Congress has refused to approve it); 4) steady decreases in budget requests for the Defense Department; 5) scattering U.S. military forces across the globe for "police" and "guard" duty; 6) condoning covertly or overtly, China's strategic and strategic activities in Central America; to name just a few. As many foreign nations know, a healthy domestic economy has little to do with international influence and the ability to successfully protect sovereign interests and the rights of citizens. It takes a strong military to retain economic and political power. Because of the all of the above factors and more, we are facing an uncertain future. This is pointed out clearly by U.S. Senator James Inhofe in an article he wrote for the Lincoln Heritage Institute's public policy periodical the ADDRESS, entitled "The Approaching Crisis".Inhofe states, "concerns are rooted in two key problems which threaten the readiness of the U.S. Armed Forces; a lack of modernization funding which has led to older and more maintenance intensive equipment; and the increased commitment of a greatly reduced force structure." "Readiness is jeopardized because the military equipment in use is increasingly older and more time-consuming and expensive to maintain."Senator Inhofe is concerned that "eventually, we would end up with equipment that is so old and maintenance intensive, no amount of funding would keep it operational." He and his colleges on the Senate Armed Services Committee understand that "the threats of today, although dangerous, may pale in comparison to the potential threats of the 21st Century. Hopefully, the American people will recognize the crisis...and the Clinton Administration will be forced to provide sufficient funds so the military can perform its missions today, and prepare for uncertain security environment of the 21st. century."

Knowing that the U.S. military is growing weaker, and that our traditional political and economic combatants' military powers are growing strategically stronger, our ability to stand firm and defend the sovereignty of the U.S. and the rights of American citizens is significantly weakened. Senator Inhofe has the right idea - we are not isolated, and a strong, strategically and logistically prepared fighting force is crucial in order to guarantee for our children and grandchildren the Constitutional rights we and our parents have enjoyed.