skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Yesterday, President Obama addressed thousands of veterans at the American Legion convention in Minneapolis and reiterated that his administration would not reduce the federal debt on the backs of veterans. Veterans represent the largest demographics of any group, with the highest unemployment.
The American Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars, which held its convention in San Antonio, are asking what the President plans to do about unemployment as it relates to veterans? Next week the President will announce his proposal for job creation while the nation is still reeling from high unemployment, which has persisted for the past three years.
Veterans returning from both Iraq and Afghanistan face bleak unemployment prospects and a country who know very little of their sacrifice. Next weekend the nation commemorates the tenth anniversary of September 11th. The euphoria and patriotic fervor of that time has faded into history as Americans have really little or no connection to those who served in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Veterans today face a different set of circumstances then was faced by veterans from Vietnam. The nation shunned Vietnam veterans, but today the country knows little of their sacrifices and even less of military service. Too often companies have no concept of what veterans can bring to their organizations. Much of what they do know is rooted in misguided or delusionary rhetoric portrayed by Hollywood.
Veterans face the prospects of having to explain in basic terms what they accomplished in the military and at the same time reservists face the prospect of being denied a job simply because they serve in the military reserves.
Where is the America that honored its veterans?
http://militarybriefingbook.com/topic.cfm?topic=Military%20Strategy%20and%20Transformation
Today, President Obama chose labor economist Alan Krueger to be the new Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, replacing Austan Goolsbee who left this month and returned to the University of Chicago.
Krueger comes into the administration having run the "cash for clunckers" program and served in the Labor Department during the Clinton administration. His most recent position was an an economist at Princeton University. Unfortunately for Krueger, this requires Senate confirmation, which will undoubtedly highlight his lack of practical business experience.
Much of Krueger's experience has been in government and academia, with little or no business experience, which has been the complaint against many of the President's advisers and appointments.
This comes at a crucial time for the President, as his next task after Labor Day will be to unveil his job proposal and his plan for reducing the enormous federal debt. His speech will come on the heals of Friday's job report by the Labor Department, which will further fuel the fire already raging over the stagnate economy.
Next week should be an interesting and volatile week.
http://militarybriefingbook.com/topic.cfm?topic=U.S.%20Politics
Yesterday, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) issued a report that unemployment is projected to fall from 9.1 percent in the second quarter of 2011, to 8.9 percent in the fourth quarter of the year, and to 8.5 percent in the fourth quarter of 2012--and then remain above 8 percent until 2014.
Remember, back in 2009 the passage of the controversial stimulus package, which if passed, unemployment was never supposed to be above 8 percent. Fast forward to August 2011, almost $5 trillion dollars later and the nation's unemployment rate has been over 9 percent for almost three years, with it dropping below 9 percent only briefly. The Labor Department reported today that new applications for U.S. unemployment compensation rose 5,000 to 417,000.
Next month, after the Labor Day holiday, the President is going to give an address on his plan to stimulate job creation, and his proposal to reduce the massive federal debt. Since assuming office the President has repeatedly signaled that he is focusing on jobs, but has always pivoted to other priorities as the employment situation worsened in the country.
The debt debate signaled to American's the depth of dysfunction in Washington as each side blames the other for the fiscal mess, with neither side focusing on what matters most to Main Street USA; jobs.
The speech will be watched closely, and if the President reiterates previous proposals of more government spending and tax increases, the markets will have a negative reaction. Will just have to wait and see what the president proposes.
http://militarybriefingbook.com/topic.cfm?topic=U.S.%20Politics
The forty two year regime of Moammar Gaddafi appears to be over with the rebel conquest of his compound. The real work is just beginning! After forty two years of brutal rule, the institutions that sustain a modern democracy are non-existent in Libya.
Remember the euphoria that erupted after the fall of Saddam Hussein, quickly followed by anarchy as there was no government to provide for the rule of law. The west has to realize that like Iraq & Afghanistan, Libya is a tribal society with its own internal dynamics, and one we had better tread lightly as we move forward.
Currently, the U.S. needs to build a broader coalition beyond NATO, one which includes at the very least Tunisia, Egypt and other African nations, in stabilizing Libya. The U.S. will have a role, but that will be up to the President to articulate a broad strategy for Libya, and for that matter the broader Middle East. So far the President and his national security team have always been a step behind in the "Arab Spring" revolutions that have swept the region.
The President has already stated, 'no American boots will be on the ground in Libya,' but the question is, will NATO assume that role. NATO was barely hanging on when the rebels advanced into Libya. NATO is having a difficult time sustaining troop commitments in Afghanistan, will they be willing to provide the forces necessary to sustain the transition to a democratic Libya?
The weeks and months ahead should be interesting.
http://militarybriefingbook.com/browse.cfm?category=Africa&subcategory=North%20Africa
After 42 years in power, the brutal regime of Colonel Muammar Qaddafi appears to be over. Over the weekend rebel forces entered the Libyan capital of Tripoli, and reports have it that one of Qaddafi's son's has been captured by rebel forces.
For six months rebels have been trying to over through Qaddafi. In March, NATO entered the fray to prevent a humanitarian disaster, with the U.S. playing a subordinate role. The U.S. however, was still providing 75% of the funding and other logistical support. Recently NATO was having a difficult time continuing the operation as the conflict was fraying the alliance.
If this latest events provide for the removal of Qaddafi, the transition to democracy will be problematic and chaotic as the National Transitional Council (NTC) begins to assume some sort of control over the country. This rebel council had been recognized by France in March, with the U.S. reluctantly supporting it last month. As Libya is tribal society, the question remains if the NTC be able to incorporate all elements of Libyan society into a cohesive government?
In tribal societies we have seen the fragmentation of the country once the authoritative government is removed, one only has to remember the euphoria that swept Iraq after the removal of Saddam Hussein. What role will the U.S. play in assisting with the establishment of a democratic Libya? Remember, President Obama stated `there will be no American boots on the ground.`
The Libyan people are close to ending their long nightmare, but before one gets all euphoric, especially those in the west, it is important to remember that Democracy takes time to build and doesn't happen over night! The U.S. still doesn't have a clear policy for Libya, or for that matter the Middle East.
http://militarybriefingbook.com/browse.cfm?category=Africa&subcategory=North%20Africa
George Washington said it best, "The willingness with which our young people are likely to serve in war, no matter how justified, shall be directly proportional to how they perceive the veterans of earlier wars were treated and appreciated by their nation." Unfortunately, this statement rings all to true today. With the nation facing a stagnate economy, the highest demographics for those unemployed are; veterans.
Too often the nation is euphoric as they send brave men and women to preserve the freedom we cherish, but when they return, veterans face bleak employment opportunities.
I have felt this searing sting of rejection while seeking employment. Employers, not fully understanding what a veteran can bring to a company, many times ask questions that are reflections of opinions regarding military service of what Hollywood portrays. Society today has grown detached to what military service is and believing what the media tells them, which is that all veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan face some sort of psychological disorder.
Veterans today don't feel the open hostility felt by veterans returning from Vietnam, but they face the hidden rejection of society not fully understanding what they can bring to a company. Military reservists face the prospects of being denied employment just because they serve their country. I faced this myself when applying to numerous companies, always asked the same question-"when are you deploying'? The other question is, what can your experience from the military bring to our organization.
This is why I started Military Briefing Book so that I can employ veterans who are shunned by a country they swear allegiance to protect, and I urge you to encourage others to do the same. As we ponder my opening statement of a past president, General George Washington (who served his country in the military) we can ask ourselves, where has America gone.
http://militarybriefingbook.com/browse.cfm?category=Military%20Strategy%20and%20Transformation&subcategory=Military%20Reserves%20and%20National%20Guard
Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta stated yesterday that deep defense cuts would "terribly weaken" U.S. national security. Speaking at a rare joint news conference with Secretary of State, he cautioned against radical defense reduction, which would have a devastating effect on U.S. national security.
"We recognize that we're in a resource limitation here, and that we got to deal with those challenges, " said Panetta. "But I don't think you have to choose between our national and fiscal responsibilities. And I want the country to know that we can get this done, but we have to do it in a way that protects our national defense and protects our national security."
Right now it seems that the budget is determining what the national security of the United States should be instead of the other way around. Currently, a revolution in military strategy is being waged in national security circles as to which direction the United States heads in the coming decades. Conventional threats, that had been the hallmark of U.S. national security focus since the end of the Second World War, have been replaced by unconventional and asymmetric security threats.
With the change in the challenges faced by the U.S., it alters what types of weapons the Pentagon will need in the future. At the same time the Pentagon will have to realign its procurement and acquisition systems to meet these new challenges. Currently, the Pentagon operates under an antiquated budget system, in which billions have been squandered without any real oversight and direction. This must change!
As I mentioned yesterday, a dedicated task force needs to be established to look and make the necessary recommendations on how the Pentagon can realign its priorities, look at the duplication of services that are inherent in each military branch, and ultimately end outdated practices.
Failure to address political reality will have the Pentagon forced to make reductions, not by national security concerns, but by budget realities. This focus will place the security of the nation in peril.
http://militarybriefingbook.com/topic.cfm?topic=Military%20Strategy%20and%20Transformation
With the nation mired in massive debt and the fight in Washington over how to reduce the bloated federal debt every federal program needs to be included in deficit reduction; and that includes the Defense Department.
Too often many in Washington hold defense reductions in the same way, many refuse to entertain any thought of reducing or overhauling entitlement spending as a way to rein in federal spending. The time has come where defense spending has to be included in reducing the federal debt.
Instead of handing the Defense Department over to budget cutters, Washington needs for the first time to look how the Pentagon can reduce spending without reducing military readiness and power projection. Too often in the past, short-sighted policies place the nation in peril, without thinking of what future threats or contingencies will be. The reduction of the Defense Department, after World War II had a disastrous effect on the U.S. in the early days of the Cold War and which the U.S. paid dearly for in the beginning of the Korean War. The same could be said for the time following the Vietnam War and in the 1990's.
The Defense Department needs to overhaul and change how it operates and look at every aspect of procurement and acquisition; this also includes looking at duplication between the various military services. Each military service has unique capabilities that are inherent in that service, but that said, too often many of the same services duplicate supply, communications, and other aspects that could be standardized throughout the Department of Defense.
The time has come for the Pentagon to commission a task force that looks at all aspects of Pentagon spending; otherwise reductions will be made, and as we know, history repeats itself, which will be detrimental to the national security of this country.
http://militarybriefingbook.com/topic.cfm?topic=Military%20Strategy%20and%20Transformation
Yesterday, President Obama addressed thousands of veterans at the American Legion convention in Minneapolis and reiterated that his administration would not reduce the federal debt on the backs of veterans. Veterans represent the largest demographics of any group, with the highest unemployment.
