Henry L. Stimson Quotes

This was an official publication of the U. S. Army. The First World War had very little affect on future military preparedness At that time conservatives in Congress were very isolationist and military preparedness was not a high priority or even a significant political issue. The Democrats then were more supportive of military spending than the Republicans. It took World War II, for which America was very unprepared, to produce a change in public and political opinion regarding military preparedness.

She was the 5th female member of the House and its first Jewish member. She was the first woman on the House Military Affairs Committee, and was one of the few Republicans who advocated spending for military preparedness. At the time of her service, many Republicans were strict isolationists.

“There” referred to the new American Colonies. He was advocating mobilizing the poor and destitute of England and sending them to America to provide manpower for a needed workforce and to be soldiers in the event of wars. The poor have historically been used indiscriminately for military manpower needs until Post WWII America where the military technology began to require minimum standards of intelligence and literacy. With the all volunteer military and higher standards, the majority of the military in America has been from the lower socioeconomic classes.

3 years later he led America on a huge invasion and nation building project in Iraq. It turned out that had he listened to his own advice and not flip-flopped, the huge cost of the Iraq War might have been avoided.

Much of the Chinese military had been distracted from military readiness in favor of political, economic, and ceremonial, activity along with extensive economic corruption. The People’s Liberation Army is a major political force in China which made this a very noteworthy chastisement. Leading Generals were with him however. See {632518}.

If a military loses a war, it has shown to be insufficient quality; if it wins, the evaluation is good. With all the talk about what makes for an effective and quality military, as the General states, it is war that is the final arbitrator. So ideally we never want to really know how good our military is.

Greek invaders were marching on Istanbul

During the presidential debates George W. Bush stated that he would be very hesitant to use the military for nation building around the world. Less than a year later, the Bush administration, faced with the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, launched a massive attack on the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. After fighting and winning the war, the military soon realized that they would in fact be involved in nation building. However, with the assistance of the United Nations much of the humanitarian burden was lifted from the U.S. military.

Essentially similar ideas were expressed earlier by George Washington and in antiquity by Vegetius and Horace.

Commenting on the hostilities between the Baltic states and the Russian government:

For most of the history of the United States – especially in the governments of our Founding Fathers, there was an extreme antithesis to defense spending and military preparedness a fact that conservatives who look to the Founding Fathers as models and legal precedents for everything that we do today generally do not realize as they lobby for defense spending. The change really took place after Pearl Harbor and WWII where America was totally unprepared for war.

At that time there were extensive meetings and discussions for the creation of what was to be the United Nations. The negative view of the United Nations or other international security organization is now and always has been held by a vocal minority in the United States.

In early America, there was great concern about a standing army—a military force that exists and is organized in peacetime. History showed the founding fathers that tyrants who siezed power almost always did so by getting control of the standing army. The logic was if there is no standing army, no one can control it and therefore no tyrant can control the country by force. At the time, however, with oceans protecting us, there was penty of time to mobilize a defensive army should any foreign power invade. However, with modern military technology, and the importantance of retaliation as a protective3 strategy, it is virtually impossible to not have a standing army and stoll be secure.

Washington, although the presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention, said almost nothing for such was the respect for him that he cou;d sway almost any issue. But the absurdity of limiting the size of the American Army was too much for him, and his clever way of phrasing his concern ended discussion of that idea without any ill feelings.

See {615006} for but one example of terrible military money and procurement management.