There are lessons to be learned from almost every experience, whether that experience is good or bad. War is not a good thing, but it is sometimes necessary when hostile, rogue nations force it upon us. We must learn from our wars – and adapt. If we fail to do so, we place our freedom and survival as a nation at risk.
Two current wars have provided us with important lessons. The Russian Federation is at war with Ukraine, and the United States and Israel are in an undeclared war with the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Normally, it is best not to scrutinize the conduct of a war while our military personnel are actively engaged in fighting it. However, the midterm national election is two months away, and the outcome of it will be significantly influenced by the public perception of the war against Iran, and to a lesser extent the Russia/Ukraine war. Therefore, this discussion is necessary.
Our European allies have allowed their defense industries to atrophy, while giving socialist domestic programs priority when allocating resources. They cannot independently conduct a large war after their stockpiles of weapons, ammunition, and other war materials are depleted. The Europeans have been buying what they need to supply Ukraine from the United States.
Lesson: It is becoming apparent that the US defense industry cannot simultaneously produce enough war materiel to support multiple continuing wars (Ukraine and the Middle East), our own domestic defense needs, drug interdiction in the Gulf of Mexico and Eastern Pacific, and our peacekeeping endeavors in the Far East.
The conventional wisdom is that things like air travel, the Internet, satellite communications, electronic money transfer, and the globalization of corporations have “shrunk the world.” In some ways that is true, but it is not true regarding America’s warmaking capability. Our recent experience has shown that our military is not large enough to meet the challenge of conducting combat and other operations in multiple theaters simultaneously.
The most salient example is the overextension of the US Navy. Careful observation reveals that the problem began when then President Barack Obama unilaterally reduced the number of our active ships. Subsequent presidents have failed to return the navy to the strength level needed to defend our interests, and those of our friends, worldwide.
When Barack Obama reduced the number of ships in the US Navy, the idea seems to have been that our weapons were so technologically advanced that our ships had become more powerful. Therefore, we didn’t need as many of them. Unfortunately, a lot of our elected representatives still think that way. Problems do not go away simply because we ignore them. For instance, the Communist Chinese are quickly achieving parity by growing the size of their navy, and their technology is getting better all the time.
It’s a big world, and it is a long way from the Panama Canal to the Strait of Bab-el-Mandeb, and from there to the Strait of Hormuz, and from there to the Strait of Taiwan. Despite the advanced weapons technology on our ships, they cannot project power to the Yellow Sea from the Gulf of Mexico.
Our Navy is spread too thin. Our ships are interdicting cartel drug smuggling in the waters the Gulf and Western Pacific, or they are involved in combat operations and the blockade in our war with Iran. We do not have enough ships in the Western Pacific to defend our interests, and those of our friends, by providing a deterrent to Communist Chinese aggression.
In the war with Iran, the need for sustained military operations has made it necessary to leave our assets on station for extended periods of time. For example, although the US Navy is doing an excellent job, the strain on personnel and equipment is taking a toll. Our military units cannot be rotated out of theater for needed maintenance, reequipping, and retraining. These things directly affect their combat effectiveness over time.
Our friends are not obligated by treaty to support offensive military actions unless we are directly attacked. Our help providing for their defense in the past has been for our mutual benefit. There is no moral or ethical justification to expect them to assist with the war with Iran if they disagree with it. Consequently, we may not be able to rely on them to let us use our bases in their countries to carry out missions if they do not like what we are doing. Therefore, we have recently become even more reliant on military operations from ships as the more dependable option.
Conditions on warships are difficult, even in the best of times. Crews work long and physically demanding shifts. The lower ranking enlisted personnel are often required rotate the use of their bunks by shift (“hot bunking”). The area they have for storage of their personal items is extremely limited. Shower time is strictly limited. The food in the navy is pretty good, but spoilage can be a problem in extremely hot climates. Our service people are tough, and they voluntarily endure hardships on our behalf. However, the heat above decks in the Middle East is oppressive.
Although combat effectiveness must necessarily be the first concern, the impact of long deployments on our service peoples’ lives is an important consideration. Our ongoing struggle in the Middle East, since 11 September 2001, has disrupted family life. Our service members and their families sacrifice daily for us.
These numbers are dated (2021); however, we can safely estimate that, our navy has less than 300 active ships. The navy has indicated that we need at least 355 ships to perform its global mission. In our research, we have seen that estimate go as high as 500 ships. Ships are expensive, and it takes a long time to build one. It might take until 2049 to get to 355 ships at a cost of $26.6 billion a year. [1]
Unless federal spending patterns change, we will be challenged to pay for entitlement social programs, national security spending, servicing the national debt, and other federal programs. The Trump Administration has asked the US Congress to approve $1.5 Trillion in additional defense spending. [2] It comes down to hard choices. We cannot have both “guns and butter” without risking runaway inflation driven by excessive government spending.
Lesson: Resources are finite. We need to learn that the US Armed forces cannot be everywhere at once unless they get a lot bigger. If our national security calls for our armed forces to perform multiple regional missions simultaneously, or fight a full-scale world war, its current size is inadequate.
Our military service members are dedicated and loyal. President Trump may believe that limiting the killing in the war with Iran is preferable to a more aggressive military approach, and he must be given credit for it. Although his negotiating strategy may be that he has “all the time in the world” to resolve this matter in our favor, the people doing the fighting do not.
Our conduct of the war against Iran impacts the world economy, of which the United States’ economy is a part. We have destroyed much of Iran’s ability to conduct offensive military operations. All they have left is harassing fire from their missiles and drones. Desperate people continue to fight on by using whatever they have left. In Iran’s case, the only truly powerful means they have to resist is by disrupting the world’s oil supply, so that is what they have been doing.
The “leading economic indicators” show that the US economy is strong. Terms like the creation of new jobs, the unemployment rate, attracting industry back to the United States, the prime interest rate, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average and so forth are poorly understood by many American voters. What Mr. and Mrs. America know and understand is that the price of food and gasoline are so high that they are having trouble affording the basic necessities of life.
Lesson: If we ever want to win this fight, we must take away Iran’s ability to disrupt the world economy and ours. People vote with their wallets, and the economic crunch the average American voter is feeling is going to kill our chances to retain a conservative voting majority both houses of Congress. Without that, President Trump will have big trouble on The Hill during the remaining term of his presidency. No 35-state whirlwind campaign tour will fix it, and the Iranian Regime knows it.
In Lamp in a Corner I have repeatedly said that the United States of America must never engage in a military conflict unless we are willing to do whatever it takes to win by destroying the enemy’s will and ability to resist. World War II was the last war in which we did so. Our subsequent military adventures have not produced satisfactory results. We have no right to ask the American people to sacrifice our blood and treasure unless we win – period.
Lesson: Don’t start anything you can’t finish … expeditiously. The US military is an awe-inspiring fighting force. We must grow it enough to meet the challenges we face around the world. There is no substitute for victory. We will not see Iran permanently desist from its nuclear ambitions, state sponsorship of terrorism, and attempts to control the Strait of Hormuz until the IRGC and the radical clerics are removed from power.
When the Russian Federation invaded Ukraine, the invasion failed. As always, there is more than one reason for their failure. It is my opinion that one of the reasons for the Russian failure may have been that the generals who planned the invasion were either trying to curry favor with Vladimir Putin by promising an easy victory, or they were just too afraid of him to oppose him. It illustrates a flaw, common to peacetime armies, that becomes apparent when they must go to war.
Lesson: The leaders of a nation’s military must be promoted to their positions based on their demonstrated abilities, rather than on the correctness of their politics. We must stop making our military a political football. When correct politics takes precedent over demonstrated competence, we fall into the same trap that the Russians did in Ukraine. We are all on the same team, and we need to be pulling in the same direction.
“Those who do not
learn history are doomed to repeat it.”
George Santayana [3]
You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else.
Winston Churchill [4]
