Pentagon Wants US Ready
For 2 Wars At Same Time

The Pentagon is considering a change in its military strategy that requires U.S. soldiers to be ready to fight two major wars at the same time, The New York Times reported.
The newspaper said that the changes are aimed at freeing more resources for the defense of U.S. territory and the fight against terrorism.
In their Qadrennial Defense Review mandated by Congress, top military officials are concerned that the concentration of U.S. forces in Afghanistan and Iraq is limiting the army's ability to deal with other potential armed conflicts, The Times said.
"The two-war model provides enough people and weapons to mount a major campaign, like the Persian Gulf war of 1991 or the invasion of Iraq in 2003, while maintaining enough reserves to respond in a similar manner elsewhere," the daily said.
The Pentagon is now questioning the concept of the two-war strategy, the daily said, adding that a prolonged military commitment, like the one in Iraq, can prevent the military from engaging in a full-scale campaigns elsewhere.
After years of claiming that U.S. forces were sufficient for a two-war strategy, "We've come to the realization that we're not," an unidentified Defense Department official was quoted as saying. "It's coming to grips with reality."
The two-war strategy requires more high-technology weapons, in particular warplanes, The Times said.
But it added that a focus on one war and counterterrorism efforts would require lighter, more agile forces, perhaps fewer soldiers, but more Special Operations units and a range of other requirements, such as intelligence, language and communications specialists.
The Defense Review, due to be presented to Congress by next year, is "an effort to create a construct that will bring a better balance" among domestic Defense, the antiterrorism campaign and conventional military requirements, the officials told the daily.
Military officials are also considering in detail what would happen if the U.S. decided to attack China, North Korea or Iran.
"The war in Iraq requires a very large ground-force presence ... War with China or North Korea or Iran ... would require a much more capable Navy and Air Force," said Loren Thompson, an analyst at the Lexington Institute, a policy research center in Arlington, Virginia.
"What we need for conventional victory is different from what we need for fighting insurgents, and fighting insurgents has relatively little connection to stopping the spread of nuclear weapons. We can't afford it all," he added.