Success of one’s country is unattainable unless accompanied by its battle force. In every nation, it is inevitable to have a military department. In United States, the army has performed a crucial role in the development starting from its birth in the 14th day of June 1775. If not succeeding ten battles, since the American Revolution, way through the Cold War and the Gulf War, it will not be able to lead its way to the present War on Terrorism (Murray n. d).
It is composed of the “Regular Army” which plays as an active duty component hand in hand with the Army National Guards Reserve Components and the U.S Army reserve (Murray n. d). The Threat In response to the enormous changes happening in the realm of the national security, military leaders are to change its strategies to be able to accompany the evolving threat in the defense system. It was learned in the September 11 bombing that the enemies are also changing its way- critically studying the actions of the US military, planning how to attack successfully, keenly noting the responses, and most of all how it will attack successfully targeting the vulnerable features. Nowadays, they use sophisticated technologies and methodologies for espionage.
There is even some equipment of the adversaries that are difficult for the military to monitor. Precisely, the danger of international terrorism urge continued alertness. The terrorists had learned from their committed faults and success. The future terrorists are vigilant with their destructive weapons and dangerous technologies for their dreaded vicious ambition. Likewise, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is earning a serious threat to the national security. Examples of which are the use of chemical and nuclear weapons that may cause an adverse effect biologically.
Some biological and other chemical agents can be very hazardous when disseminated through air ventilation system. Also include is the popular industrial chemical hydrogen sulfide that is deadly and often use as diversionary in the terrorists’ primary activity. Conversely, the adversaries are dying to penetrate foreign interest by penetrating the US intelligence community. The role of the intelligence of the military is to trace the terrorists’ activities and intelligence bounded in opposition to the United States.
They intended to investigate espionage ad be equipped of the latest innovation in the country’s science and technology sector. Included in their new tactics is changing the environment intelligence, likewise hiring non-intelligence personnel for surveillance activity. Furthermore, there is a concern in maintaining the integrity of the information system of the country because of its vulnerability. The country’s reliance on telecommunications and computer networks has been a target of cyber attackers.
They might direct assault to the power plants, telephone networks, banks, air traffic control systems and military networks. The terrorism acts may be classified into three. These are the state-sponsored terrorism which draws against the international law, the international terrorists and the domestic terrorists. Also falling in the category of terrorist are the loosely affiliated extremists. These kinds of terrorists are seen to pose the most critical threat to the country. The adversaries are emerging and getting near to its goal which is to do the act of terrorism.
Surely, they are preparing again for the next attack. Feeling secure and confident in the absence of enemies is not tolerated anymore. Even their presence is deniable, you will never know once a twin towering building filled with busy people and transactions is horribly put down by an attack. Gauging the terrorists’ existence is really a difficult task. But as a pre-emptive measure, the military will not just sit and wait for another. In order to protect its country at its best they are to implement transformation strategies.
These will also act as preparation measures. An Analysis of the Comparison and Contrast of the Military Transformation Efforts The efforts of the military to transform in Clinton’s administration had been accused of poor leadership. At the onset of his administration there has been an excessive downsizing of the US military. According to critics, this move had excessively downsized the US defense system and seriously weakened the country’s fighting mechanism. However, this was only a notion and only true for those who do not believe on him.
The use of force of the previous president’s administration may be questionable but his ability to retain the high state of readiness and a strong global prevention position had made him successful despite the downsizing of the military officials by 15 percent during his term. The success in Kosovo, Bosnia, Iraq and Afghanistan has been credited to him because of his initiated defense policy. However, the weakness of his defense policy lies on the military’s inability to maintain their moral and integrity. There has been a problem in the distribution of tasks.
Demanding workloads had been unfairly distributed. Though this problem had been resolved by the end of the decade, it certainly detracts the achievements of the military during his term. During his term, modernization of the military is also his goal. They allotted fund for the preparation of weapons to be use in the battle and they also purchased battlefield technologies even there is only little fund. All in all, accusing Clinton as a poor steward is wrong because he had vigilantly prepared his military and boldly set up the military for modernization. Meanwhile, George W.
Bush, views transformation, as more than the need for modernization, it also requires ingenuity, creativity and a bit of adventurousness. “All the advanced technology in the world will not transform our military if we do not transform our thinking (Bush n. d). ” At the onset of his administration, the president, gave emphasis to the transformation of the defense strategy as a pre-cursor to the future defense of the United States. He focuses on the large-scale innovation. Specifically he is pointing out on the knowledge on space as a competitive edge and a very important advantage.
The strategy is to identify the characteristics in space that will not only be an advantage for US forces but also for carrying out in the full range of operations. This will comprise billions of the National Defense budget as already allotted. This will be use to strengthen and widen the opportunities of US in space. It is in lieu with the goal of projecting long distance attacks, precisions of the weapons, under-sea warfare capabilities, and intelligence enhancement. The need for transformation is determined by four imperatives: the strategy, risk mitigation, threat and of course.
These will also act as preparation measures. The efforts made by the two administrations to transform the military are a great leap from the traditional system. Both administration values modernization as the key to attaining confident military system, equipped with innovative tools and facilities that will prepared the troops for the unforeseen battle. One major difference in their vision of transformation is the budget allocation to the defense system. In Bush administration, there has been a noted downsizing in the military system including personnel.
Budget for military has been very scarce that time, but the administration was still able to maintain preparedness. Unlike in Bush administration wherein there is an increase in the budget allotted for the military. Another deviation is the mission of George W. Bush to have knowledge on the attributes of space as a competitive edge. The three missions mentioned by the Deputy Defense Secretary in 2003 and the four imperatives by President George W. Bush should be enacted hand in hand because a failure of not including one may endanger the US defense per se.
Furthermore, there has been a decline in the military’s moral and integrity due to the problem in the division of workload across the military unit. While in Bush administration, uplifting the moral of the military is one of the priorities. Certainly, the idea of transformation should not only be credited to President Bush because if we may recall, this vision started in Clinton’s administration. Their acts just vary in degree and intensity, although, President’s Bush vigilance and radicalism is noteworthy.