There are two resources you should keep your eye on in interpreting the current positions of the defenders of large military budgets.
The first is the Strategic Studies Institute of the US Army War College and the other is the Project for National Security Reform (PNSR).
Since 2005, both of these organizations have done a series of studies on what they call “national security reform”, studies that look to redefine the mission and structure of the US national security institutions on as sweeping a scale as was done in 1947 — but to do it in order to preserve high levels of defense funding.
One of the studies that PNSR did was a visioning study of needed changes to US national security institutions. This study hypothesized nine threats to US security and gamed how they would be dealt with now and how they could be deal with after the instituion of certain reforms.
The scenarios that the PNSR vision working group picked are:
1. Red Death – A country struggles to get back on its feet after a major biological attack in the midst of a debate about the future US role at home and abroad.
2. Peoples War – The US is caught up in global asymmetric warfare against a nuclear-armed great power. The US must respond to anonymous attacks at home and abroad without escalating to a nuclear conflict.
3. Grand Strategy – The utility of an the capability to develop an integrated grand strategy in smoothing the transition from one presidential administration to the next.
4. A New Economy – The US faces its greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression.
5. Pax Robotica – Continuation of the trend of escalating robotic and sensor technology. Public policy choices to enable more real-time interaction between the military, diplomatic and intelligence organizations of the US government.
6. Who Holds the High Ground – A land grab for the moon.
7. A Brave New World – A plan to provide proven neuroscience, psychiatric, and medical techniques to control pathological behaviors in a world awash in readily accessible weapons of mass destruction.
8. A Warm Reception – Developing international consensus of the matter of global climate change and possible unintended consequences.
9. It’s a Small, Small World – Nanobots have become ubiquitous. These are expanding in novelistic detail in pages 23-77. Read from the standpoint of the craft of fiction for an interesting perspective on the use of your tax money.
That is by far the most fascinating document. However a report for the Strategic Studies Institute used case studies of Truman, Nixon, Mondale, George H. W. Bush, and Al Gore to make a proposal to institutionalize the behind-the-scenes (then they won’t be, eh) foreign policy responsibilities of the vice-president. We need to monitor these discussions carefully. They intend to influence policy. And we need to frame some alternative proposals from our vision and present it in more realistic and better-thought-through terms than the nine scenarios.
On the road from the Chicago Public Library main branch. Keep our libraries public and free.




18 Comments

It is always helpful in dealing with people’s perceptions of threat to make a first hypothesis that the identified threats are projections. The second hypothesis is that they are conventional wisdom.
About #7:
“7. A Brave New World – A plan to provide proven neuroscience, psychiatric, and medical techniques to control pathological behaviors in a world awash in readily accessible weapons of mass destruction.”
What if the ‘pathological behaviors’ are coming from the PSNR Deciders?
Thanks, and rec’d, as always. Stay sage in that toddlin’ town.
Where’s the study to have an economy which could pay for implementing these studies? Or even a few of them?
I don’t see a study which faces the prospect that one’s competitor (China), make all the stuff you’d need to face them militarily.
Impressive, THD. Wish I had something intelligent to say.
This is supposed to be serious type dee cee beltway policy threat by who? Newtie Gingrich?
I did not see the scenario that is reality.
10. A small group of billionaire, predators, corrupts democracies, and creates false terror. Then Police State tactics create a Gulag a prison for dissenters, and everyone is monitored 24 hours a day by corporate puppets. Also corporations are allowed unlimited pollution of air earth and water.
Hmmm… No study on the rapid expansion of our vast MIC/Intel Apparatchik and the massive Outsourcing of our capabilities to Multinational Corps, the veritable ‘Blue Tag/Green Tag’ conflicts of interest in all that expansion…!
Probabilities for this list of horribles?
Thanks for the good information, Tarheel.
I’ve heard about SSI before, but not PNSR. I suspect that 99.9999% of the population has never heard of either one.
Or put differently, what is the probability of a single human dying from any one of these vs. dying of acne, for example.
Oh, yeah, like that’s going to happen. Uh, wait….
The PTB have no nationality. They use the US agencies for their own. Every time you think you have the root in hand it is but an illusion. They think they can control the world. They cant.
“They think they can control the world. They cant.” Doesn’t stop them from trying though does it?
Hell yeah. You would think owning all the best in higher education would see some sense. BUT nooooo they storm into butt shit stupid manipulation. What was it yesterday the TPP Now that is some dumb ass dumb ass.
OT – love your handle! made me chuckle…
How about -
10. The US military spends trillions on stupid wars started by an even more stupid President while the US nation falls apart due to rampant corruption, fraud, tax cutting and deregulation. Shell shocked veterans forced into a career of vicious deployments return to a third world country with a for sale government being run by a bunch of insolvent banksters and psychopathic CEOs determined to milk every last red cent out of the country before they abandon it.
Pax Robotica?
Oh wonderful, they’ve built skynet.
Spot on comment-
The “threats” analysis is done in good faith by good people but the PTB only use it to justified ever larger military/intel budgets that can send ever more corporate welfare money to the MIC via “supply/service outsourcing for unneeded or over priced relative to gov worker/military recruit doing the job” “needs”. It is truly a 1984 “we are now at war with” day where the corporations do not care about the nation – only about their piece of the ever larger budget.
And the Dems fear cuts in the rate of growth of defense/intel – as required in the debt limit bill – because it upsets those that contribute to their campaign – again not giving a damn about the country or its citizens. God forbid we should ever discuss actually reducing the dollars in the military/intel budget back th Bill Clinton levels.
*heh* I’d like to see Carter levels, papau…! Prior to Reagan’s massive expansion…! ;-)