| Comment Number: | OL-10504232 |
| Received: | 3/8/2005 6:48:00 PM |
| Subject: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment |
| Title: | National Security Personnel System |
| CFR Citation: | 5 CFR Chapter XCIX and Part 9901 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
RE: "The Case for Action" -- President Bush's goal of fashioning "...a future force that is defined less by size and more by mobility and swiftness...." etc. seems to me to be a recipie for a national catastrophe. If we base our national defense on a small, elite military force, highly trained in the use of complex technology, then, IF that small force should encounter unexpected catastrophic casualties, (i.e., the type of casualties that seem to happen in any major war) then the war would be over the minute those casualties occurred, and the United States would be forced to surrender. Throughout history, those nations have been stongest who have maintained large standing armies, drawn directly from their civilian populations. History shows that when a nation begins to whittle down its armies in size, or to encourage foreigners to join their ranks in hopes of gaining citizenship, or to hire mercenaries -- that is the point in time when that nation's fortunes begin to wane. I believe it was the American philosopher George Santayana who said, "Those who do not learn from history, are bound to repeat it." If I am correct in my thinking that the current Presidential Administration is deficient in its understanding of history (and the quote at the beginning of this statement leads me to believe that it is), then, the U.S. may be at considerable risk. I believe that those features of the NSPS which would promote a substantial, reduction in the government civilian workforce, are a dangerous aspect of these regulations, which should somehow be reduced in their potential impact -- or in the immediacy of their impact.