Features

June 1, 2010  

Forum pick: From our online discussion boards

Posturing a military for the future necessarily involves assuming risk. Mr. Scharre’s argument is that that risk should be assumed on the ‘war-winning’ side of the Army, as opposed to the ‘nation-building’ one. That to me seems rather reckless.”

— ARMY COL. BILL BETSON (RET.) COMMENTS ON PAUL SCHARRE’S ARTICLE “A BALANCING ACT,” MAY AFJ (http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2010/05/4537293)

Paul Scharre responds

“You raise an excellent point about the historical dangers of inaccurately predicting future wars. Some balance is required in order to be flexible enough to cope with a range of future contingencies. … My intent is precisely to suggest, in fact, that no parts of a campaign ought to be favored over others, but rather that the war should be considered in its totality.”

Post your thoughts and continue the debate at http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/forums.