For more than 3 decades, the term "hollow army" or the more expansive idiom, "hollow force," has represented President Carter's alleged willingness to allow American military capability to deteriorate in the face of growing Soviet capability. The phrase continues to resonate today. In this current period of declining defense resources, the President of the United States, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have articulated how the newly released strategic guidance and budget priorities ...
Read More
For more than 3 decades, the term "hollow army" or the more expansive idiom, "hollow force," has represented President Carter's alleged willingness to allow American military capability to deteriorate in the face of growing Soviet capability. The phrase continues to resonate today. In this current period of declining defense resources, the President of the United States, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have articulated how the newly released strategic guidance and budget priorities signify a concerted effort not to "hollow out" U.S. forces. They have affirmed their dedication to preventing the recreation of the ragged military and disastrous deterioration in defense capability the Carter administration allowed to occur. However, it is also time to reexamine the term "hollow army" and its meaning as the inevitable tug of war over defense spending gets underway. This Paper places the "hollow army" metaphor within its historical context: barely 5 years after the United States finally disengaged from a major war (Vietnam), a struggling economy, and an election year in which a President was not only tenuously leading in the polls, but also confronted substantial opposition from elements of his own political party. Over the years, a specific political reading of these events has taken hold. It is the purpose of this Paper to re-read the historical events, and in doing so, come to a better understanding of the domestic political and geostrategic environment during Carter's presidency, the U.S. Cold War strategy, and the assertions made concerning the readiness of the U.S. Army to perform its missions.
Read Less
Choose your shipping method in Checkout. Costs may vary based on destination.
Seller's Description:
Very good. No dust jacket. Cover has slight wear and soiling. ix, [1], 65, [1] p. This is one of the Letort Papers. Endpapers. For more than 30 years, the term hollow army has represented President Carter s alleged willingness to allow American military capability to deteriorate in the face of growing Soviet capability. The true story is more complicated than the metaphor suggests. FRANK L. JONES is Professor of Security Studies at the U.S. Army War College, Carlisle, PA. Professor Jones served for more than 30 years in federal service, first as a commissioned officer in the Vietnam-era United States Army and as a civilian, beginning as a President Management Intern in 1979 with the Department of the Army. In 2006, he retired from the Department of Defense (DoD) as a member of the Senior Executive Service, where he held a number of positions in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. He led the interagency task force responsible for formulating the National Strategy for Maritime Security under President Bush and was one of the principal authors of the DoD s Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support.
Choose your shipping method in Checkout. Costs may vary based on destination.
Seller's Description:
LIKE NEW. PAPERBACK. Like new. In the "Letort Papers" series. Blue cover, 2012, SSI, 65pp. **We provide professional service and individual attention to your order, daily shipments, and sturdy packaging. FREE TRACKING ON ALL SHIPMENTS WITHIN USA..
