shogun

"This nation has given DOD an end strength. The Army has met that end strength. They are now mismanaging it."

Huh? The Army and Marines are sending men and women back to Iraq and Afganistan for their 3rd and 4th deployments? If "recruiting goals" are being met, then the policy makers have failed us again (shades of Rumsfeld) in not anticipating correct troop strength-- but that still doesn't change the fact that the Army is too small for its current mission and our answer seems to be just keep sending 'em back. (I hope our answer isn't "the Army is just mis-managing".) As for "parading the war dead", I see nothing wrong with a little reminder of the sacrifice already made in response to the article's comment that the USMA motto should be changed to "evade, avoid, nfl", as if cadets are out looking for a "way out" and Academy officials are more than happy to show them. The article was written in an insulting manner, and the list of former graduates KIA for our nation in the War on Terror was meant to emphasize that point. Cadet Campbell took his re-affirmation oath in his Junior year, the same as everyone else. He understands his duty, and if the Army sends him here or there he will go.

Regardless, if a draft isn't going to happen (and it won't), if American's aren't going to join the ground forces in enough strength to make any difference (and they aren't), then it may be time to start expanding the role of women in combat roles, and moving men and women from the other branches and training them for life on the ground in the Middle East.
Again, not only did the policy makers fail to plan, react, and then re-plan, our leaders failed to even ask the nation for either more personnel or money. We tried to do it with what we already had, and borrowed to pay for it.
Now, here we are.

Ann--interesting comment on the programs requirement to make the officers pay back part of their education if they go qualify for and choose ASO. That certainly should make it more palatable for some.