DOING MORE WITH LESS: SecDef Donald Rumsfeld has
ordered the military to revise all war plans to incorporate the strategic and logistical advantages made possible by precision weapons and other technological innovations, reports Thom Shanker (what an unfortunate surname) and Eric Schmitt in today's New York Times. (via
Drudge).
An excerpt:
The new approach for how America goes to war, Mr. Rumsfeld said, reflects an assessment of the need after Sept. 11 to refresh war plans continuously and to respond faster to the threats from terrorists and nations possessing biological, chemical or nuclear weapons. Mr. Rumsfeld said too many of the military plans on the shelves of the regional war-fighting commanders were freighted with outdated assumptions and military requirements, which have changed with the advent of new weapons and doctrines.
"Looking at what was overwhelming force a decade or two decades ago, today you can have overwhelming force, conceivably, with lesser numbers because the lethality is equal to or greater than before," he said.
It has been a mistake, he added, to measure the quantity of forces required for a mission and "fail to look at lethality, where you end up with precision-guided munitions which can give you 10 times the lethality that a dumb weapon might, as an example."
Makes sense to me. Many bureaucrats — civilian and military — instinctively oppose the concept of doing more with less. But how can they plausibly disagree with Rumsfeld's contention that if one precision bomb does the work of 10 "dumb" bombs, then it requires fewer people and resources to implement the bombing?
So why this order
at this time? Here's my guess . . .
Lessons from the liberation of Afghanistan surely played a part in Rumsfeld's decision. However, the timing of the order suggests that the covert reconnaissance phase of the war to liberate Iraq — which has been underway since last spring — is nearly complete. And the results of that recon effort have led Rumsfeld to order a new, more lean approach to phase two, the overt phase. In other words, widespread reports earlier this year that toppling Saddam would require a massive American invasion were off-the-mark.
The next phase of the war to liberate Iraq is about to begin. And it will be waged — and won — with fewer ground troops than were deployed in Desert Storm.
