Tony Darling’s Post

This article does a great job of highlighting the impact of Trump's comments regarding defense spending. It makes reference to the NATO target of 2% GDP and how barely half of NATO is expected to achieve that target in 2024. Given the Russian invasion of Ukraine - on the NATO border - One wonders just what sort of existential threat it will take to change defense spending policy in the NATO nations that are failing to meet the agreed spending target. I'm not supportive of Trump's comments because there are other measures that can be used to incentivize allies to contribute to defending Western society; however, he is right with respect to the need for NATO nations to step up to the mark with a full commitment to defense spending. And, I support tougher action to achieve that aim. Stoltenberg's view that 2% is the floor, not the upper bound is also key: Time to discuss a return to NATO's original target - 3%. Or, maybe higher? If you want to hear about how NATO came to set a benchmark of 2% GDP on defense spending, which nations are making the grade, which are not, and what Julianne Smith (US Ambassador to NATO) had to say about it, head over to Episode 28 of 'Spartan Spirit Leadership', on all the usual podcast sites. https://lnkd.in/giNrfbit

Fantastic article by Jerry Hendrix. He is correct, the U.S. is not ready for three separate, but intrinsically linked conflicts on the Eurasian continent (ie - Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan). We simply do not have the manufacturing base needed to serve as the "Arsenal of Democracy." Congress needs to approve the Supplemental Defense Funding for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan that will rebuild the Defense Industrial Base. Synopsis of the article: - We are facing a significant probability of global military cataclysm, and we are not ready. - We need a strong and unassailable military-industrial capacity to deter war; if deterrence fails, we will need that same capacity to avoid disaster and survive as a great power. - We need ships. We need aircraft. We need missiles. But more fundamentally, we need to be able to build them in much larger numbers than we have the capacity to build today. - The US is not able to serve as “the arsenal of democracy” for the world because the nation’s defense-industrial base has shrunk considerably. - We simply don’t have the manufacturing base we once had, and we are no longer a primarily industrial power. - Few Americans outside the national security field know this but in 1993 the Clinton Administration forced 107 defense companies to consolidate down to five “prime” defense contractors or go out of business. - Furthermore, DoD's portion of federal budget went from 6% GDP in 1980s to 2.5% GDP today. - Therefore, constant over-regulation, inconsistent funding, and forced consolidation by government fiat, turned our once robust, innovative, and competitive DIB into the inflexible, risk-adverse, sloth that it is today. - We must do better; our national security depends on it. - To address this strategic shortfall, America must begin at the foundation. We must invest in a larger Defense Industrial Base. - Every action should be taken with the intent of expanding the industrial base and increasing competition among defense contractors.

The world is on fire, and we’re facing yet another government funding deadline. Congress has yet to pass the final six appropriation bills, including one for defense. Washington’s lawmakers must do their job and provide the United States Department of Defense with the funding and tools they need to meet the demands of today and tomorrow. As Adm. Christopher Grady said, “We must continue to adapt, advance, and innovate at speed and at scale across all domains.”     While Congress appears on the verge of passing the final six appropriation bills, they do not get gold stars for doing their job six months late, slowing needed defense investments. The Pentagon leadership indicated the cumulative effects of the 25-year unbroken record of Congress not doing their work on time - DOD has lived under continuing resolutions for a total of 5 entire years. Our major adversaries, China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran don't have this problem. Congress should continue to have the power of the purse and the oversight of our national security establishment, but they need to do their work on time.    Honored to offer my thoughts on the budget battle alongside many other experts in a recent Foreign Policy article. #dod #defense #defensebudget #congress   https://lnkd.in/exBPzdp6

We need to embrace a new mind-set. We need politicians who dare to tell the truth—including that defense and military-equipment investments are an essential element in the defense of freedom and peace. We need business and labor leaders prepared to take responsibility beyond the interests of their individual companies. Ultimately, we need a new William S. Knudsen.

I find it difficult to follow some of the arguments in this piece. Firstly, like most warmongering U.S. politicians, just to name a few: Mitt Romney, Chuck Schumer and of course the 'elderly man with a poor memory'; the author seems to accept the discourse that NATO member states would be 'attacked by Russia' without the U.S. support. This is the very type of 'reasoning' that enabled NATO the false pretence of numerous preemptive wars and continued expansion. For those who feel they must line up in the anit-Trump camp, I would say that some would agree that there might not be a Russia/Ukrain war if Trump was still in the white house today.. In any case, our close alliance with the U.S., according to this joint statement: "... Our relationship is founded on a shared commitment to supporting an open, stable and prosperous Indo-Pacific, and a peaceful, inclusive and rules-based international order based on respect for international law and the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states. It is anchored in shared values of democracy, the rule of law, and the protection and promotion of human rights." Isn't it ironic that the U.S. remains the biggest sponsor of Israel's genocidal war to this day. I question which 'shared values' can we still be so vocal in advocating today??

“A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction. Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peace time, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea. Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United State corporations. This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence-economic, political, even spiritual-is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.” - President Dwight D. Eisenhower (Farewell Address, January 17, 1961) ✝️🙏🏻🇺🇸

#NationalPOWMIARecognitionDay remembers and honors those Americans who were prisoners of war and who served and never returned home. The Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency (DPAA) is responsible for providing the “fullest possible accounting for our missing personnel from past conflicts to their families and the nation.” The DPAA searches for those missing from World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Cold War, the Gulf Wars, and other recent conflicts. More than 81,000 American personnel are currently listed as Missing in Action. The DPAA estimates that almost 39,000 are recoverable, with the others being lost at sea. In the 2023 Presidential Proclamation on National POW/MIA Recognition Day, President Biden wrote, “Above the White House and the United States Capitol — and at military bases, memorials, cemeteries, and homes across America — we fly the POW/MIA flag, and we remember what it represents: the thousands of spouses, parents, sons, daughters, and loved ones who served and sacrificed for our freedom and future; loved ones who mourn with unanswered questions still in their hearts; and the debt of gratitude we owe them that we can never fully repay. We cannot and must not forget our obligation to our unreturned heroes — no matter how long it takes.” Learn more about the DPAA and their ongoing recovery effortshttps://lnkd.in/eQhNKmwb #OurPromise

Building the nation is not just about infrastructure, politics, and military might. It is also about building successful businesses that serve the nation and the world.

Congress has approved legislation that would prevent any president from withdrawing the United States from NATO without approval from the Senate or an Act of Congress. The measure, spearheaded by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), was included in the annual National Defense Authorization Act, which passed out of the House on Thursday and is expected to be signed by President Biden. The provision underscores Congress’s commitment to the NATO alliance that was a target of former President Trump’s ire during his term in office. The alliance has taken on revitalized importance under Biden, especially since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. #nato #uscongress #ussenate #treaty #internationalaffairs #internationalrelations #ir #globalsecurity https://lnkd.in/eqx_8Rip

"Over the past two decades America expended vast resources to fight scheduled wars that, at a strategic level, resulted in failure. The grand “nation-building” and “state-building” projects pursued by successive administrations, Democrat and Republican, depleted our national resources, shrank the nation’s military to the point where we are able to fight only in one major theater, reduced and consolidated our defense industrial base such that we no longer have the capacity to produce weapons and munitions at speed and scale, and most of all, sapped public confidence that our leaders are able to provide effectively for our security and defense, and to do so at an acceptable cost. During the two decades of the Global War on Terror and “overseas contingency operations” we seem to have forgotten the basic verities of great power politics, i.e., that there is no substitute for hard power, and that in a state-on-state near-peer conflict a country’s military capabilities ultimately rest on its manufacturing capacity, its manpower reserves, and its human capital, for without them no nation will have the requisite resilience to deter and, if need be, defeat its enemies.  The United States needs a generational investment in defense, an effort that will require the next administration to articulate a clear vision of victory – not in normative terms and values, but one that speaks directly to geopolitics, our economic welfare, and the security of our homeland. We need a strategy that returns national security priorities to our economic policy-making, speaks directly to the imperative of re-shoring our critical manufacturing and supply chains, and most all is grounded in the clear articulation of the hierarchy of our national interests. Those critical of increased defense spending argue that the American public will not support more military spending, but the truth is that as of today nobody has made a clear case to the public about how dangerous the international system has become, and what is at stake." https://lnkd.in/gdMbZeMz