2011The US Army War College Quarterly ParametersOpen access

Assessing the Army Profession

Charles D. Allen

Open full text 9 citations

Abstract

This is a revised and expanded paper based on C. D. Allen, "The Impact of a Decade at War" in the Armed Forces Journal, May 2011.The author is a member of the Army Profession Campaign's research team. C ivilian and military leaders might easily discount the conjecture thatAmerica's Army is in trouble.After all, it is unmatched as a fighting force and successfully conducted military operations that achieved regime change in two countries in the space of 18 months.Total US military spending averaged nearly $720 billion over the past four years and exceeded 46 percent of global defense spending in 2009.The $6.73 trillion spent by the US Department of Defense in the 21st century dwarfed the annual gross national product of most other nations.Commensurate with this level of resourcing, the Army possesses the most modern equipment, the latest technology, and an unequalled training program for its people.Combine all this with the relatively high confidence placed in the Army (as part of the US military) by the American people, and it would be easy to feel invincible.Harvard's Center for Public Leadership National Leadership Index ranked the US military as the American institution with the most confidence in its leadership (a trend since 2005); a similar Gallup poll ranked the military at the top since 1989. 1 A recent study reported that while over half of American survey respondents said that the post-9/11 wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were "not worth fighting" (52 and 57 percent, respectively), 91 percent "felt proud of the soldiers serving in the military." 2 While Americans may have doubts about current wars, they are supportive of their warriors.Even with such levels of fiscal support and public confidence, we should be cautious of our enthusiasm and reminded of the retort to a comment made by COL Harry Summers during the latter days of the Vietnam War.Summers is quoted as saying, "'You know, you never beat us on the battlefield,' I told my North Vietnamese counterpart during negotiations in Hanoi a week before the fall of Saigon.He pondered that remark a moment and then replied, 'That may be so, but it is also irrelevant.'" 3 Public support and confidence may indeed be irrelevant if America's Army does not adequately prepare for the future.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This is a revised and expanded paper based on C. D. Allen, "The Impact of a Decade at War" in the Armed Forces Journal, May 2011.The author is a member of the Army Profession Campaign's research team. C ivilian and military leaders might easily discount the conjecture thatAmerica's Army is in trouble.After all, it is unmatched as a fighting force and successfully conducted military operations that achieved regime change in two countries in the space of 18 months.Total US military spending averaged nearly $720 billion over the past four years and exceeded 46 percent of global defense spending in 2009.The $6.73 trillion spent by the US Department of Defense in the 21st century dwarfed the annual gross national product of most other nations.Commensurate with this level of resourcing, the Army possesses the most modern equipment, the latest technology, and an unequalled training program for its people.Combine all this with the relatively high confidence placed in the Army (as part of the US military) by the American people, and it would be easy to feel invincible.Harvard's Center for Public Leadership National Leadership Index ranked the US military as the American institution with the most confidence in its leadership (a trend since 2005); a similar Gallup poll ranked the military at the top since 1989. 1 A recent study reported that while over half of American survey respondents said that the post-9/11 wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were "not worth fighting" (52 and 57 percent, respectively), 91 percent "felt proud of the soldiers serving in the military." 2 While Americans may have doubts about current wars, they are supportive of their warriors.Even with such levels of fiscal support and public confidence, we should be cautious of our enthusiasm and reminded of the retort to a comment made by COL Harry Summers during the latter days of the Vietnam War.Summers is quoted as saying, "'You know, you never beat us on the battlefield,' I told my North Vietnamese counterpart during negotiations in Hanoi a week before the fall of Saigon.He pondered that remark a moment and then replied, 'That may be so, but it is also irrelevant.'" 3 Public support and confidence may indeed be irrelevant if America's Army does not adequately prepare for the future.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 9 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This is a revised and expanded paper based on C. D. Allen, "The Impact of a Decade at War" in the Armed Forces Journal, May 2011.The author is a member of the Army Profession Campaign's research team. C ivilian and military leaders might easily discount the conjecture thatAmerica's Army is in trouble.After all, it is unmatched as a fighting force and successfully conducted military operations that achieved regime change in two countries in the space of 18 months.Total US military spending averaged nearly $720 billion over the past four years and exceeded 46 percent of global defense spending in 2009.The $6.73 trillion spent by the US Department of Defense in the 21st century dwarfed the annual gross national product of most other nations.Commensurate with this level of resourcing, the Army possesses the most modern equipment, the latest technology, and an unequalled training program for its people.Combine all this with the relatively high confidence placed in the Army (as part of the US military) by the American people, and it would be easy to feel invincible.Harvard's Center for Public Leadership National Leadership Index ranked the US military as the American institution with the most confidence in its leadership (a trend since 2005); a similar Gallup poll ranked the military at the top since 1989. 1 A recent study reported that while over half of American survey respondents said that the post-9/11 wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were "not worth fighting" (52 and 57 percent, respectively), 91 percent "felt proud of the soldiers serving in the military." 2 While Americans may have doubts about current wars, they are supportive of their warriors.Even with such levels of fiscal support and public confidence, we should be cautious of our enthusiasm and reminded of the retort to a comment made by COL Harry Summers during the latter days of the Vietnam War.Summers is quoted as saying, "'You know, you never beat us on the battlefield,' I told my North Vietnamese counterpart during negotiations in Hanoi a week before the fall of Saigon.He pondered that remark a moment and then replied, 'That may be so, but it is also irrelevant.'" 3 Public support and confidence may indeed be irrelevant if America's Army does not adequately prepare for the future.

Key concepts: Political science, Law, Public administration

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Assessing the Army Profession — Research Paper | ScholarLens