The continuous military interviewing crisis has  , dominated stories, with the Army, Air Force, and Navy , all falling short , of their targets last year. Concerns over preparation and skill interest are common, yet being a primary focus of this year’s Heritage Foundation , index of defense strength. But, attributing the recruiting problems to “woke society” or limited benefits misses a more logical main cause: Without a just war to burn our patriotism, Americans are not in a rush to register. However, the real problem with recruiting soldiers is not the ability to keep up with our military, but rather the readiness of our military.
Gen. Patton when said,” Americans love to struggle. The bruise and conflict of war are beloved by all true Americans. The declaration captures a amazing facts about the American spirit, people do not join the military because they want to document paperwork, fresh offices, and do daily vehicle maintenance. When you see a recruiting corporate on television, you watch images of fortitude erupt, and the hero nature persists. People who feel the phone to offer, those who will raise their right hand to protect our freedom, are deeply moved by these moments.
In 2024, America faces increasing and worrying threats from reactionary foreign entities like China, Iran, and North Korea, but as a nation, the United States is essentially at peace. A professional force with recruiting quotas and readiness metrics to meet has a bit of a problem with peace, but it does n’t spell total disaster.
The record-breaking volunteer response following 9/11 and the surge of enlistments following Pearl Harbor demonstrated that when America is threatened, the volunteers will come. Right now, for most Americans, there is no imminent challenge to our safety. Would-be recruits are specifically discouraged by this sense of security.
Our current focus should be on war variables that cannot volunteer at a moment’s notice: ships, technology, and weapons systems. These crucial resources demand long-term production and investment. Weapon systems must be constantly updated to stay ahead of potential adversaries, advanced technology has a very long production timeline, and ships and weapons take years to build.
According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies ( CSIS), the entire defense- industrial base lacks the capacity, ability, and surge capability to meet the U. S. military’s wartime needs. Importantly, China is acquiring sophisticated weapons and equipment six times more quickly than the United States.
Shipbuilding, vital to challenging a rising China in the Pacific, is behind schedule across the board, with some ships already years behind schedule. Right now, the Navy lacks the ships it needs for peacetime operations, and with the current infrastructure, the U. S. ca n’t catch up to compensate for our current needs. This will turn out to be a significant Achilles heel in a major conflict with China.
The issue is not just with the ships ‘ weapons, but also with their own. America could run out of critical long-range, precision-guided munitions in less than a week if a conflict with China broke out in the Taiwan Strait. It , can take years , to produce critical weapons systems, like anti- ship missiles, which will be critical during a major conflict.  ,
Across the Department of Defense, critical weapons systems are being expended ( or given away ) faster than they’re being produced, from tomahawk cruise missiles , to 155mm artillery shells. This is a risky move because it leaves the United States with scant wartime stocks and no industrial base to build up enough for a major conflict.
The solution is n’t as straightforward as boosting production when war breaks out. As we learned with Ukraine, increasing production to meet wartime demand is a slow process, even when motivated. It is anticipated that production will reach 85, 000 shells per month by fiscal year 2028 after two years of the conflict, with production woefully lacking in artillery ammunition. In a few days, Ukraine will fire that many shells.
Years ago, we were forced to reinvest in our military-industrial base. We allow our country’s production capacity and capabilities to decline, which is unacceptable because it poses the greatest threat to our country’s security by investing heavily in them. Our military would not continue to shrink under his leadership if Biden truly believed that” we are the world power.”
History demonstrates that Americans have always risen up to face the enemy when it matters most, despite the alarming recruiting crisis. Our top priority should be immediately bolstering the logistical and technological foundation of our military. When the time comes, volunteers will follow, but only if we have the resources to ensure victory.
Conservative activist and author Philip Reichert. He is a former U. S. Army intelligence analyst, contractor for the U. S. Space Force, and producer at Fox News.
