
As NATO's war against Libya nears its sixth-month anniversary, there's one question that keeps churning over and over again in what passes for my mind: why can't the most powerful military alliance in history topple a third-rate army? I discuss the topic with John Nagl of the Center for a New American Security, Paul Hughes, a retired Army officer with the U.S. Institute of Peace, and Andrew Exum, a former Army officer now as CNAS who oversees the Abu Muqawama blog.
| more |
Why did the U.S. military agree to do the "heavy lifting" in the opening days of the war with Libya -- launching long-range bombing strikes from the continental U.S., among other martial fireworks -- before handing off the next nearly six months (and counting!) to our NATO allies? Is this a new way of waging war on the cheap for the U.S. military? A template for future multi-national military campaigns? John Nagl of the Center for a New American Security and yours truly discuss the issue with Andrew Exum, a former Army officer now with CNAS, and Paul Hughes, a retired Army colonel and Libya expert now with the U.S. Institute of Peace.
| more |
This week on Command Post we're taking a look at what has been going on for more than five months -- yikes, by my watch that's nearly half a year -- in Libya. This was supposed to be a flick-of-the-wrist military action by the most powerful military alliance in the history of the world. NATO chieftains expected the barrage would lead to Muammar Gaddafi's political, if not literal, demise in short order. But that hasn't happened, and with every passing day NATO seems to be more lashed to the word hapless. But back to the start of this campaign on March 19: just what makes Libya worth risking any American lives or U.S. taxpayer dollars? John Nagl of the Center for a New American Security and your Battlelander discuss the U.S. national interests at stake in Libya -- or the lack thereof -- with Paul Hughes, a retired Army colonel now with the U.S. Institute of Peace, and Andrew Exum, a former Army officer who led Rangers in Afghanistan and Iraq, and now a CNAS senior fellow.
| more |
Following World War II, perhaps it was inevitable that the U.S. military would be consigned to walking beats around the world like a neighborhood cop -- from Europe to Asia -- especially as the Cold War heated up. But now that the Cold War has been over for a generation, does it still fall to the U.S. to patrol the world's hotspots -- especially when that means that other, just as wealthy nations, might be getting a free ride? Your Battleland trooper debates the topic with John Nagl of the Center for a New American Security, along with Nora Bensahel, a military strategist now at CNAS, and retired Army lieutenant general Dave Barno.
| more |
On July 28, 2011, the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) released a major report, Aum Shinrikyo: Insights Into How Terrorists Develop Biological and Chemical Weapons, with never-before documented information on the group and its operations. Part One of the report release event features Nathaniel Fick, Richard Danzig and Marc Sageman discussing Aum Shinrikyo as an organization and its turn to violence.
| more |
Many experts say the industrial-era personnel system still in use by the Pentagon -- with its up-or-out promotions, its non-vesting pension system for the first 20 years, and its decrepit means of evaluating officers -- was perfect for World War II. But now that we have an all-volunteer force reliant on skilled people who often can find work elsewhere, is the current system the best way to maintain the world's best military? John Nagl of the Center for a New American Security and your Battleland correspondent tussle with the issue, with help from Dave Barno, a retired Army lieutenant general, and Nora Bansahel, a former Rand Corp. military strategist now at CNAS.
| more |
On July 28, 2011, the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) released a major report, Aum Shinrikyo: Insights Into How Terrorists Develop Biological and Chemical Weapons, with never-before documented information on the group and its operations. Part Two of the report release event features Richard Danzig discussing Aum's chemical and biological weapons and applications to today's threats.
| more |
On July 28, 2011, the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) released a major report, Aum Shinrikyo: Insights Into How Terrorists Develop Biological and Chemical Weapons, with never-before documented information on the group and its operations. Part Three of the report release event features Richard Danzig, Marc Sageman, Lloyd Hough and Terrance Leighton answering questions from the audience.
| more |
One of the intriguing things about recently-departed defense secretary Robert Gates -- pretty much a lifetime spy -- was his concern that the U.S. toolkit was out of whack when it comes to weapons v. diplomacy. He'd frequently mention how there were more sailors on an aircraft carrier, or musicians in the Pentagon's bands, as there are foreign service officers working for the State Department. Does he have a point? Debating the issue is your Battlander joined by John Nagl of the Center for a New American Security and Nora Bensahel and Dave Barno, two of John's colleagues at CNAS.
| more |
As the Defense Department looks to the future, how many of its pieces -- redundant air forces and duplicate armies among them -- are really needed for the nation's security? How many fall into the nice-to-have basket that might no longer be affordable? The topic gets kicked around by John Nagl of the Center for a New American Security and your Battlelander, along with Dave Barno, a retired Army lieutenant general, and Nora Bensahel, a military strategist at CNAS.
| more |