<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">

<channel>
	<title>Defense Strategy Review</title>
	
	<link>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr</link>
	<description>from the Project on Defense Alternatives</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2013 16:10:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/DefenseStrategyReview" /><feedburner:info uri="defensestrategyreview" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" /><item>
		<title>Reasonable Defense: A Sustainable Approach to Securing the Nation</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/m5TyUDlK3Ow/reasonable-defense-a-sustainable-approach-to-securing-the-nation</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/reasonable-defense-a-sustainable-approach-to-securing-the-nation#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2012 21:43:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Debates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Grand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pick of the Posts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AllServices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Budget]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Modernization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RolesandMissions]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=3309</guid>
		<description>(printable PDF version) (summary) (appendix of tables and charts) by Carl Conetta, Project on Defense Alternatives Briefing Report, 14 November 2012. Provides a detailed strategic argument for the re-balancing of investments in the instruments of national power and offers a new force posture and Pentagon budget appropriate to strategic conditions.  Main report includes 9 tables. [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/m5TyUDlK3Ow" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/reasonable-defense-a-sustainable-approach-to-securing-the-nation/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/reasonable-defense-a-sustainable-approach-to-securing-the-nation#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>USA and Allies Outspend Military Rivals by Four-to-One:  America Carries Heavy Defense Burden for Allies</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/thq_iEqKkpg/usa-and-allies-outspend-military-rivals-by-four-to-one-america-carries-heavy-defense-burden-for-allies</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/usa-and-allies-outspend-military-rivals-by-four-to-one-america-carries-heavy-defense-burden-for-allies#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2012 19:46:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Assessments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pick of the Posts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Budget]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NetAssessment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=3280</guid>
		<description>Carl Conetta. PDA Briefing Memo #55, 18 July 2012. http://www.comw.org/pda/fulltext/120717-US-world-military-spending.pdf Efforts to cull savings from the US defense budget for purposes of deficit reduction have been stymied by Pentagon claims that any significant cut might have “devastating” or even catastrophic” effects. However, a review of global defense spending data by the Project on Defense Alternatives [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/thq_iEqKkpg" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/usa-and-allies-outspend-military-rivals-by-four-to-one-america-carries-heavy-defense-burden-for-allies/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/usa-and-allies-outspend-military-rivals-by-four-to-one-america-carries-heavy-defense-burden-for-allies#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Myths vs. Realities of Pentagon Spending</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/oloEXI0jnUc/myths-vs-realities-of-pentagon-spending</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/myths-vs-realities-of-pentagon-spending#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2012 20:05:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Budget]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=3284</guid>
		<description>Stephen Miles and William D. Hartung. Center for International Policy Fact Sheet, 17 July 2012. http://defensealt.org/NB2hfR Excerpt: Nearly all of the purported &amp;#8220;cuts&amp;#8221; to the Pentagon&amp;#8217;s budget are actually reductions in the rate of growth, rather than true cuts in funding levels. In reality, even if sequestration is fully enacted as planned under the 2011 [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/oloEXI0jnUc" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/myths-vs-realities-of-pentagon-spending/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/myths-vs-realities-of-pentagon-spending#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>US and Allies Dominate Group of Top Military Spenders</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/blDVaSDTHqw/us-and-allies-dominate-group-of-top-military-spenders</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/us-and-allies-dominate-group-of-top-military-spenders#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Jun 2012 00:40:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pick of the Posts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Budget]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NetAssessment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=3267</guid>
		<description>Project on Defense Alternatives, 29 June 2012. How much is enough spending for the Pentagon? By various measures, the United States has outspent the next nine, 14, or 21 countries combined. What is perhaps more telling is that most of those other countries are staunch US allies. * International Institute for Strategic Studies ** Stockholm [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/blDVaSDTHqw" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/us-and-allies-dominate-group-of-top-military-spenders/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/us-and-allies-dominate-group-of-top-military-spenders#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>The Pentagon Jobs Machine Is A Bust</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/_h11BADgG9Q/the-pentagon-jobs-machine-is-a-bust</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/the-pentagon-jobs-machine-is-a-bust#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2012 18:30:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pick of the Posts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Budget]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=3261</guid>
		<description>A Project on Defense Alternatives Commentary, 26 June 2012. After years of touting the necessity of guns over butter, the defense establishment has changed its tune. With the official US unemployment rate stuck at over 8 percent, Pentagon flaks are now boldly declaring that &amp;#8220;guns are butter.&amp;#8221; The Department of Defense as a social program? [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/_h11BADgG9Q" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/the-pentagon-jobs-machine-is-a-bust/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/the-pentagon-jobs-machine-is-a-bust#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Panetta explains Pentagon’s ‘pivot’ toward Asia</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/uBQs4dftAnc/panetta-explains-pentagons-pivot-toward-asia</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/panetta-explains-pentagons-pivot-toward-asia#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 19:56:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USMC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USN]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=3243</guid>
		<description>David Cloud. Los Angeles Times, 01 June 2012. http://defensealt.org/NW22HP Excerpt: &amp;#8230;the Pentagon plans to increase the Pacific fleet from 50 warships to 58, according to two Pentagon officials who discussed the plans on condition of anonymity. In addition, Panetta said that more than 40 Navy ships in the Pacific would be replaced with &amp;#8220;more capable [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/uBQs4dftAnc" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/panetta-explains-pentagons-pivot-toward-asia/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/panetta-explains-pentagons-pivot-toward-asia#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Security and stability in Afghanistan: Progress and Risk</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/SEjmxgH9QQo/security-and-stability-in-afghanistan-progress-and-risk</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/security-and-stability-in-afghanistan-progress-and-risk#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2012 19:01:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Af-Pak]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COIN]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=3230</guid>
		<description>C.J. Radin. The Long War Journal, 08 May 2012. http://defensealt.org/Je0Hex Excerpt: On May 1, the US Department of Defense (DoD) released its latest semi-annual report on security and stability in Afghanistan. The report documents significant progress in both developing the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) and in degrading the Taliban insurgency. A thorough analysis also [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/SEjmxgH9QQo" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/security-and-stability-in-afghanistan-progress-and-risk/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/security-and-stability-in-afghanistan-progress-and-risk#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>NATO Nuclear Weapons and the Defence and Deterrence Posture Review: A Non-consensual Debate</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/aEUhGDciPbs/nato-nuclear-weapons-and-the-defence-and-deterrence-posture-review-a-non-consensual-debate</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/nato-nuclear-weapons-and-the-defence-and-deterrence-posture-review-a-non-consensual-debate#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 May 2012 20:09:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nukes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=3235</guid>
		<description>Wilbert van der Zeijden. Open Security, 07 May 2012. http://defensealt.org/Jcdn7A Excerpt: Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany have acknowledged publicly that they would like to see the US nuclear weapons all three are hosting removed from their territories. Yet the debate in NATO on this issue lacks transparency and accountability.&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/aEUhGDciPbs" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/nato-nuclear-weapons-and-the-defence-and-deterrence-posture-review-a-non-consensual-debate/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/nato-nuclear-weapons-and-the-defence-and-deterrence-posture-review-a-non-consensual-debate#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Military base issues limit Pentagon’s options for post-war Afghanistan</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/JlPeuSqvV_4/military-base-issues-limit-pentagons-options-for-post-war-afghanistan</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/military-base-issues-limit-pentagons-options-for-post-war-afghanistan#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 May 2012 21:41:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Af-Pak]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=3227</guid>
		<description>Carlo Munoz. The Hill, 06 May 2012. http://defensealt.org/IDlUxL Excerpt: President Obama&amp;#8217;s pledge to not build any permanent military outposts in Afghanistan could throw a wrench in the Pentagon&amp;#8217;s postwar plans for the country, once U.S. troops leave in 2014. The president&amp;#8217;s promise, made during Tuesday&amp;#8217;s nationally televised speech from Afghanistan, is an integral piece of [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/JlPeuSqvV_4" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/military-base-issues-limit-pentagons-options-for-post-war-afghanistan/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/military-base-issues-limit-pentagons-options-for-post-war-afghanistan#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>The Realists in Tehran</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/ztXaedUdX3Q/the-realists-in-tehran</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/the-realists-in-tehran#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 May 2012 20:57:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ForeignPolicy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nukes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=3188</guid>
		<description>Sergey Markedonov. The National Interest, 4 May 2012. http://defensealt.org/J9a1FN Excerpt: The Iranian problem stands out on the international agenda. But it is much broader and more diverse than Iran’s desire to acquire a nuclear bomb. Iran is accused of being a source of both regional instability and far-reaching geopolitical ambitions. Although today&amp;#8217;s Iran demonstrates a [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/ztXaedUdX3Q" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/the-realists-in-tehran/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/the-realists-in-tehran#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>What if realists were in charge of U.S. foreign policy?</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/_BLAuWdp-9I/what-if-realists-were-in-charge-of-u-s-foreign-policy</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/what-if-realists-were-in-charge-of-u-s-foreign-policy#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2012 21:33:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ForeignPolicy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intervention]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=3223</guid>
		<description>Stephen M. Walt. Foreign Policy, 30 April 2012. http://defensealt.org/JXUjc5 Excerpt: The liberal/neoconservative alliance is responsible for most of America&amp;#8217;s major military interventions of the past two decades, as well as other key initiatives like NATO expansion. By contrast, realists have been largely absent from the halls of power or the commanding heights of punditry. That [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/_BLAuWdp-9I" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/what-if-realists-were-in-charge-of-u-s-foreign-policy/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/what-if-realists-were-in-charge-of-u-s-foreign-policy#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>One U.S-Afghan Security Pact, Two Very Different Missions</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/WNP_c9LVvpk/one-u-s-afghan-security-pact-two-very-different-missions</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/one-u-s-afghan-security-pact-two-very-different-missions#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2012 19:24:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Af-Pak]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SOF]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=3168</guid>
		<description>Spencer Ackerman. Danger Room, 23 April 2012. http://defensealt.org/JCKNPc Excerpt: To be blunt: Afghanistan is valuable to the United States because it’s the most logical place from which to conduct a war in Pakistan that’s primarily fought by armed drones and occasionally special operations forces. It’s not really valuable in and of itself. The U.S. interests [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/WNP_c9LVvpk" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/one-u-s-afghan-security-pact-two-very-different-missions/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/one-u-s-afghan-security-pact-two-very-different-missions#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>On the hook in Afghanistan for at least another decade</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/W6YyACaH2CY/on-the-hook-in-afghanistan-for-at-least-another-decade</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/on-the-hook-in-afghanistan-for-at-least-another-decade#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2012 19:11:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Af-Pak]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ForeignPolicy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=3161</guid>
		<description>Philip Ewing. DoD Buzz, 23 April 2012. http://defensealt.org/Ic1h0p Excerpt: Washington had no good choices on Afghanistan. The White House probably hopes its agreement will give enough distance that most American troops can come home and force the Afghans to step up, as planned, but also keep Afghanistan close enough that it doesn’t again offer a [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/W6YyACaH2CY" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/on-the-hook-in-afghanistan-for-at-least-another-decade/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/on-the-hook-in-afghanistan-for-at-least-another-decade#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Time to get U.S. nukes out of Europe</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/FFAEwfPLiFA/time-to-get-u-s-nukes-out-of-europe</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/time-to-get-u-s-nukes-out-of-europe#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2012 19:18:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Comments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Operational]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Budget]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ForeignPolicy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nukes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=3165</guid>
		<description>Stephen M. Walt. Foreign Policy, 18 April 2012. http://defensealt.org/Ifat2Q Excerpt: There&amp;#8217;s an overwhelming case for removing these archaic and unnecessary weapons from the European continent. Ideally, we would do this as part of a bilateral deal with Russia, but we ought to do it even if Russia isn&amp;#8217;t interested. Editor&amp;#8217;s Comment: Couldn&amp;#8217;t agree more!&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/FFAEwfPLiFA" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/time-to-get-u-s-nukes-out-of-europe/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/time-to-get-u-s-nukes-out-of-europe#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Air Force Ramps Up Drone War</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/NhQQauXcKfE/air-force-ramps-up-drone-war</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/air-force-ramps-up-drone-war#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2012 14:07:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Af-Pak]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USAF]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=3155</guid>
		<description>Jefferson Morley. Salon.com, 5 April 2012. http://defensealt.org/Hmesu7 Excerpt: &amp;#8230; the Reapers are now launched from two locations and carry out five sorties per day. The Air Force anticipates that activity will double in 2013 to four locations and 14 sorties a day. By 2015, the scope of the Reaper program is expected to double again [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/NhQQauXcKfE" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/air-force-ramps-up-drone-war/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/air-force-ramps-up-drone-war#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>The Politics of Fleet Constitution</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/ahFySWwAg5o/the-politics-of-fleet-constitution</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/the-politics-of-fleet-constitution#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 17:16:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Budget]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USN]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=2993</guid>
		<description>Galrahn. Information Dissemination, 27 March 2012. http://defensealt.org/GY5CjA Excerpt: The Navy has put 7 cruisers up for early retirement. Keep in mind that all 7 cruisers put up for early retirement in FY13 and FY14 are capable of being modernized for ballistic missile defense&amp;#8230;It is fairly obvious to this observer that the Navy put these cruisers [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/ahFySWwAg5o" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/the-politics-of-fleet-constitution/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/the-politics-of-fleet-constitution#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>The Future of Irregular Warfare</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/149tauJH-PI/the-future-of-irregular-warfare</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/the-future-of-irregular-warfare#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 16:57:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Af-Pak]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AllServices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COIN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HybridWar]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=2983</guid>
		<description>Seth G. Jones. RAND, 27 March 2012. http://defensealt.org/HzvPUo Excerpt: By early 2012, there were approximately 432,000 counterinsurgency forces in Afghanistan – approximately 90,000 U.S. soldiers, 30,000 NATO soldiers, 300,000 Afghan National Security Forces, and 12,000 Afghan Local Police. In addition, the United States spent over $100 billion per year and deployed a range of sophisticated [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/149tauJH-PI" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/the-future-of-irregular-warfare/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/the-future-of-irregular-warfare#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>U.S., Australia to broaden military ties amid Pentagon pivot to SE Asia</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/mO_ljMORYdY/u-s-australia-to-broaden-military-ties-amid-pentagon-pivot-to-se-asia</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/u-s-australia-to-broaden-military-ties-amid-pentagon-pivot-to-se-asia#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:53:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[China]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ForeignPolicy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USMC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USN]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=2997</guid>
		<description>Craig Whitlock. Washington Post, 26 March 2012. http://defensealt.org/HzVeNJ Excerpt: The United States and Australia are planning a major expansion of military ties, including possible drone flights from a coral atoll in the Indian Ocean and increased U.S. naval access to Australian ports, as the Pentagon looks to shift its forces closer to Southeast Asia&amp;#8230;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/mO_ljMORYdY" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/u-s-australia-to-broaden-military-ties-amid-pentagon-pivot-to-se-asia/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/u-s-australia-to-broaden-military-ties-amid-pentagon-pivot-to-se-asia#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Support in U.S. for Afghan War Drops Sharply, Poll Finds</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/CqYApe8xXpg/support-in-u-s-for-afghan-war-drops-sharply-poll-finds</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/support-in-u-s-for-afghan-war-drops-sharply-poll-finds#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:11:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Af-Pak]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=2989</guid>
		<description>Elisabeth Bumiller and Allison Kopicki. New York Times, 26 March 2012. http://defensealt.org/HyL9li Excerpt: The latest New York Times/CBS News poll&amp;#8230;found that more than two-thirds of those polled — 69 percent — thought that the United States should not be at war in Afghanistan. Just four months ago, 53 percent said that Americans should no longer [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/CqYApe8xXpg" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/support-in-u-s-for-afghan-war-drops-sharply-poll-finds/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/support-in-u-s-for-afghan-war-drops-sharply-poll-finds#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Throwing Money at the Pentagon: A Lesson in Republican Math</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/dQeSwnfXdn4/throwing-money-at-the-pentagon-a-lesson-in-republican-math</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/throwing-money-at-the-pentagon-a-lesson-in-republican-math#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:04:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Budget]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=2986</guid>
		<description>William Hartung. Foreign Policy in Focus, 26 March 2012. http://defensealt.org/HsgyYJ Excerpt: Romney’s proposal implies that the Pentagon is essentially an entitlement program that should receive a set share of our total economic resources regardless of what’s happening here at home or elsewhere on the planet. In Romney World, the Pentagon’s only role would be to [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/dQeSwnfXdn4" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/throwing-money-at-the-pentagon-a-lesson-in-republican-math/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/throwing-money-at-the-pentagon-a-lesson-in-republican-math#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Talking About Talks: Toward a Political Settlement in Afghanistan</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/vvtUCiTZWes/talking-about-talks-toward-a-political-settlement-in-afghanistan</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/talking-about-talks-toward-a-political-settlement-in-afghanistan#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Mar 2012 14:41:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Af-Pak]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ForeignPolicy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=3051</guid>
		<description>International Crisis Group. Asia Report N°221, 26 March 2012. http://defensealt.org/H6bVBL Excerpt: A negotiated political settlement is a desirable outcome to the conflict in Afghanistan, but current talks with the Taliban are unlikely to result in a sustainable peace. There is a risk that negotiations under present conditions could further destabilise the country and region. Debilitated [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/vvtUCiTZWes" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/talking-about-talks-toward-a-political-settlement-in-afghanistan/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/talking-about-talks-toward-a-political-settlement-in-afghanistan#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Pentagon Base Budget to Get Bigger Share in 2013</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/Y08ioJf3ryA/pentagon-base-budget-to-get-bigger-share-in-2013-2</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/pentagon-base-budget-to-get-bigger-share-in-2013-2#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2012 16:13:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Budget]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=3054</guid>
		<description>Carl Conetta. PDA Briefing Memo #54, 23 March 2012. http://defensealt.org/GTaHbL On 13 February 2013, President Obama put down the administration’s marker in the budget debate for 2013. The President’s request proposes a budget pie about as large as the one adopted in 2008. However, comparing the 2013 request to the sum appropriated in 2008 shows [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/Y08ioJf3ryA" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/pentagon-base-budget-to-get-bigger-share-in-2013-2/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/pentagon-base-budget-to-get-bigger-share-in-2013-2#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Pentagon Base Budget to Get Bigger Share in 2013</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/LLQe2reuQhQ/pentagon-base-budget-to-get-bigger-share-in-2013</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/pentagon-base-budget-to-get-bigger-share-in-2013#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2012 15:17:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Editor's]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pick of the Posts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Budget]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=2924</guid>
		<description>Carl Conetta. Project on Defense Alternatives Briefing Memo #54, 23 March 2012. A comparison of discretionary spending in 2008 and 2013 shows an increased tilt toward the &amp;#8220;Security Basket&amp;#8221; and National Defense. http://defensealt.org/GTaHbL&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/LLQe2reuQhQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/pentagon-base-budget-to-get-bigger-share-in-2013/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/pentagon-base-budget-to-get-bigger-share-in-2013#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>A New Challenge for Our Military: Honest Introspection</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/B0tm6JUjfVk/a-new-challenge-for-our-military-honest-introspection</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/a-new-challenge-for-our-military-honest-introspection#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2012 19:28:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AllServices]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=2895</guid>
		<description>David Rothkopf. Foreign Policy, 19 March 2012. http://defensealt.org/GSUypF Excerpt: Certainly there has been national debate about whether we should have been involved in those wars, one that has belatedly delivered the message to our political leadership that it is time to bring our troops home. But about one crucial array of issues concerning our involvement [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/B0tm6JUjfVk" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/a-new-challenge-for-our-military-honest-introspection/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/a-new-challenge-for-our-military-honest-introspection#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>U.S. War Game Sees Perils of Israeli Strike Against Iran</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~3/QrKZyZJJ6kw/u-s-war-game-sees-perils-of-israeli-strike-against-iran</link>
		<comments>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/u-s-war-game-sees-perils-of-israeli-strike-against-iran#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2012 13:24:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>editor</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Documents and Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Iran]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nukes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/?p=2892</guid>
		<description>Mark Mazzetti and Thom Shanker. New York Times, 19 March 2012. http://defensealt.org/GJt7O3 Excerpt: A classified war simulation held this month to assess the repercussions of an Israeli attack on Iran forecasts that the strike would lead to a wider regional war, which could draw in the United States and leave hundreds of Americans dead, according [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DefenseStrategyReview/~4/QrKZyZJJ6kw" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/u-s-war-game-sees-perils-of-israeli-strike-against-iran/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://www.comw.org/wordpress/dsr/u-s-war-game-sees-perils-of-israeli-strike-against-iran#utm_source=feed&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=feed</feedburner:origLink></item>
	</channel>
</rss><!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

 Served from: www.comw.org @ 2013-06-14 07:01:11 by W3 Total Cache -->
