The Strategika Podcast: Angelo Codevilla on Building a Military That Can Win

 

In this episode of the Strategika podcast, I talk with the great Angelo Codevilla about how to think about America’s cuts to military spending in historical terms. The resulting message: size doesn’t matter — at least not any more than a wide variety of other factors. Angelo’s argument, which starts in ancient Greece and ends in the present day: to know what kind of fighting force you need, you must first decide on what you’re asking it to do. Interviews with Professor Codevilla are always worth a listen, and this one is no exception — the joke he uses to answer my final question is, in and of itself, probably worth the price of admission. Take a listen.

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 3 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Larry3435 Inactive
    Larry3435
    @Larry3435

    Troy,

    I generally enjoy these podcasts, but Professor Codevilla’s analysis seems very poorly reasoned.  Sure, you want to design your strategy and forces for the enemy you actually face, but the US faces a wide variety of enemies and therefore needs adaptable forces.  

    And suggesting that aircraft carriers are not the best way to control an ocean is just incomprehensible to me.  Has he never heard of Midway?

    • #1
  2. Troy Senik, Ed. Member
    Troy Senik, Ed.
    @TroySenik

    Larry3435:

    Troy,

    I generally enjoy these podcasts, but Professor Codevilla’s analysis seems very poorly reasoned. Sure, you want to design your strategy and forces for the enemy you actually face, but the US faces a wide variety of enemies and therefore needs adaptable forces.

    And suggesting that aircraft carriers are not the best way to control an ocean is just incomprehensible to me. Has he never heard of Midway?

     I think he’s very vulnerable to that first criticism.

    On the second, however, his point is slightly different from the way you frame it (he may not have made this clear — I haven’t relistened to the show since we taped it). Angelo has repeatedly argued that carriers are effective tools for mid-ocean combat but that they lose much of their utility closer to land, especially when the enemy has significant shore-based resources, as in the case of China.

    • #2
  3. Larry3435 Inactive
    Larry3435
    @Larry3435

    Troy Senik, Ed.:

    Larry3435:

    Troy,

    I generally enjoy these podcasts, but Professor Codevilla’s analysis seems very poorly reasoned. Sure, you want to design your strategy and forces for the enemy you actually face, but the US faces a wide variety of enemies and therefore needs adaptable forces.

    And suggesting that aircraft carriers are not the best way to control an ocean is just incomprehensible to me. Has he never heard of Midway?

    I think he’s very vulnerable to that first criticism.

    On the second, however, his point is slightly different from the way you frame it (he may not have made this clear — I haven’t relistened to the show since we taped it). Angelo has repeatedly argued that carriers are effective tools for mid-ocean combat but that they lose much of their utility closer to land, especially when the enemy has significant shore-based resources, as in the case of China.

    In the incredibly unlikely event that we ever try a sea to land invasion of China, we will have land based resources too.  In Japan and Taiwan.  But if that was the Professor’s point, he didn’t express it very clearly.

    • #3
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.