When Obama Leaves Office, the Military Will Be Smaller Than It Was Prior to 9/11

Family Security Matters

A “tiger mom” might go ballistic if her child came home with a “needs improvement” on his kindergarten report card. But most adults wouldn’t panic. They know there is time to get the kid up to standard before the deadline for that Harvard application falls due.

Defending America is different. A sub-par grade for military preparedness ought to be an immediate concern.

Today, despite our multibillion-dollar investment, America’s military is not all that great. That was the finding of a two-year research effort by a team of analysts at The Heritage Foundation.

“The Index of U.S. Military Strength” grades the armed forces. The ranking this year? Marginal.

Heritage is not alone. Every single service chief issued a similar warning this spring, when testifying at the annual readiness hearing before Congress.

For example, Army Chief of Staff Gen. Raymond T. Odierno declared the “Army cannot fulfill its role in the defense strategy” if all cuts required under the Budget Control Act of 2011 are fully implemented.

The other services raise red flags, as well. The Marine Corps, for instance, is running about two-thirds the number of battalions it has historically needed to meet day-to-day operational demands.

Indeed, by the time President Barack Obama leaves office, every branch of the U.S. military will be smaller than it was on 9/11.

Does that make sense? Is the world safer for America today than it was on Sept. 10, 2001?

When the U.S. military lacks the capacity and capabilities to protect all its vital interests, the country is worse off. It is just that simple.

Few dispute that today’s U.S. military is comparatively smaller and less capable to handle the missions assigned to the Pentagon-especially given the variety of active adversaries and competitors. But some argue that this is no big deal.

After all, they say, nobody really wants to fight World War III with the United States.