The (Ex) Washington Realist

One point made at yesterday's roundtable on whether America is a crippled superpower or not was the question of the military instrument and its effectives (and/or degradation) in recent years. There was some discussion about Larry Johnson's comments about the rapid change in special forces, from being able to have soldiers who have served for several years being able to mentor newer recruits, now shortened. [It reminded me of comments about the problems faced by the Imperial Russian military in World War I, the utter decimation of the officer corps in 1914-16 leading to much more poorly trained and capable officers unable to handle command.]

Is it time for the United States to consider the development of a professional military arm that is divorced and separate from citizen volunteers? Our British and French allies continue to call upon the services of highly trained professional forces even as post-imperial powers.

Do we want to reach an agreement with the Kingdom of Nepal--we can certainly outbid the British, given that it appears they have shortchanged the Nepalese on pensions--(or with perhaps a pro-American former Soviet state, for example--to provide a set number of recruits who will be trained and can be sent anywhere in the world--Darfur, Lebanon, etc. What about an American Foreign Legion that offers training and eventual citizenship in return for service? Could this be one way to solve the Gordian knot of illegal migrants in the United States from Latin America--offer "no questions asked" enlistments in the American Legion?

Might this become more politically attractive if there is a rising cost to be paid from stop-loss orders, increased National Guard deployments and so on?