U.S Military Forces

Introduction

Our current National Security Strategy (NSS), National Military Strategy (NMS) and existing Army force structure were ill-conceived for the future of the Army. As a result of the Bottom-Up Review (BUR), the Army was right sized and structured to meet the requirements to fight and win two major theater wars (MTWs) and these changes put U.S military forces among the best military forces in the world. There are still some issues which should be resolved and resolving these issues help U.S military to represent itself as the best military force in the world. However, this force structure was never intended to support current deployment levels for military operations other than war (MOOTW). In fact, the BUR warned that, "protracted commitments to peace operations could lower the overall readiness of US active duty forces over time, and in turn, reduce our ability to fulfill our strategy to be able to win two nearly simultaneous major regional conflicts (US Department of Defense, 1993, p.94)."

Increased MOOTW deployments such as Somalia, Haiti and Bosnia have driven the Army's operational tempo (OPTEMPO) to historically high levels. As prophesied by the BUR, the Army's overall readiness is declining. Moreover, given our current NSS, a turbulent international community ripe with MOOTW opportunities and continuing fiscal pressures, it is unlikely the Army can expect a reduction to OPTEMPO in the near future. In short, the Army is faced with a strategy and force structure mismatch.

To become the top military force in the world, U.S military should abandon the conflict between the active Army and Army National Guard (ARNG) over Guard readiness and look at ARNG maneuver unit utility from a new perspective. The search for a new paradigm properly begins by considering the connection between readiness and risks. Reserve Component (RC) units cannot attain the ...