Proposal for Modern DOD

[FJB]

Interesting video on Thomas Burnett, PHD idea for a revamped DOD. Makes some excellent observations and proposes an interesting idea.

http://blip.tv/file/268384

S/F

[SethB]

I've been familiar with Barnett's work for a while now. I find it incredibly interesting.

First, he is the ultimate "Neocon." An Economic Liberal, in International Relations Theory, who believes that it is a good idea to invade other countries and remake them in our image. He believes that economic interconnectedness will lead to peace. For one thing, I don't think that this is the case. There are plenty of examples of countries that have gone to war against their own economic best interests. For instance, the Russian stock market declined 67% this year; after the Georgian invasion they lost something like 16,000,000,000 United States Dollars in foreign investments. In a week.

So the idea that invading failed states and creating stable economies in order to prevent war is a good idea is one that is very, very debatable.

Now, as for his arguments about the Leviathan and the SysAdmin force, I think that you've got a number of different strategies. You've got theorists who think that a well trained US military can handle full spectrum operations (I like the posts of Ken White on Small Wars Council. He thinks that recruit training should take about twice as long). And you've got the guys like Barnett who think the SysAdmin should be a separate force. And you've got the guys who think the Marine Corps should fight COIN and the Army should handle MCOs.

My thoughts are very disorganized right now, but once you swallow the blue pill and accept the idea that a major reorganization of the military is acceptable or even a good idea, then the possibilities are limitless.

ETA: He is right when he says that it was a mistake to turn inside (Creation of DHS) instead of out (revitalizing DoS and the SysAdmin).

Also, read Afghanistan and the Troubled Future of Unconventional Warfare by Hy Rothstein. He believes that the US military will never be able to fight a true UW campaign; that even SF is handicapped because it is part of the Army, and that the culture of a UW organization should be more like the OSS. Collaboration between cultural SMEs and shooters, PHDs and SNCOs, etc.

[SethB]

A better speech, that more accurately hows what he discusses in his writings.

Here (http://www.poptech.org/popcasts/PopCasts.aspx?viewcastid=12).

[mattjmcd]

for SethB-

I know it's a mistake to look with one's mouth, BUT...

Can you point to links or specific works that show he is in full lockstep with the so-called neocons? I seem to recall having heard him on air several times and came away with the impression that he is not on board with OIF, for example.

Not calling you out, btw. I am very open to correction on this. I haven't gotten around to the "...New Map" book yet.

[SethB]

Well, you caught me... I made a shortcut.

The people who brought America into the war in Iraq did so because they thought that they would be able democratize that country and make it a stable ally in the Middle East. This would then lead to greater democratization. Since these people believe the Democratic Peace Theory, they thought that invading Iraq would make the Middle East a more peaceful place. These people are Wilsonian Idealists. They approve of the use of force to spread democracy.

Barnett doesn't agree with this, because he doesn't identify with political systems, but rather economic ones. He doesn't believe that political ties bring peace, but rather economic ones.

So like the "Neocons" (and the term has been misappropriated much like I did above) he believes that invading some countries can bring peace, but the mechanism is different. He argues that countries don't go to war with their trading partners. It's no wonder that he think the US ought to ally with Iran, Russia, China and others.

As I said above, there is evidence that his argument is a little oversimplified.

Does that make sense? I reread what I wrote earlier and I agree that it is incorrect.

I would encourage you to read his books, as well as his blog. It will be an interesting experience. Once you are familiar with his terms you will be able to see the great number of people who have been influenced by his work.