The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Secretary of Defense testified recently before the House and Senate Armed Services Committees about President Biden’s fiscal year 2022 defense budget request. Some were surprised to hear China named as the “driver” or pacing threat justifying the decisions made about modernization, force structure and readiness. Whether its praise or criticism, pundits everywhere have their thoughts about how well the request meets the future and present threat. Before any of this came to light Garri Hendell penned this piece for WAR ROOM to look at the role of the U.S. Army in the future war. He has one simple rule to guide the Army; “Anything that detracts from that future mission needs to be jettisoned by the wayside or handed over to the other services.” So what is that mission?
The question of whether or not a service member with musculoskeletal injuries (MSKIs) will return to duty is a complicated process to answer. And MSKIs significantly impact medical readiness, burden the Military Health System, and contribute to service-connected disability costs. Jeffrey Tiede and Sean Moore question whether the current return to duty process is worth the effort it requires and the resources it consumes while providing unreliable outcomes. Tiede and Moore, based on their respective experiences at the Center for the Intrepid and the San Francisco VA, propose that the process must be reviewed and further developed by experts in complex systems in order to provide a timely and reliable framework for decision.