This is the part that Scott at Powerline characterized as a "catechism:"

I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems...

...I will not weaponize space...

...I will slow development of future combat systems...

...and I will institute a "Defense Priorities Board" to ensure the quadrennial defense review is not used to justify unnecessary spending...

...I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons...

...and to seek that goal, I will not develop nuclear weapons...

...I will seek a global ban on the development of fissile material...

...and I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert...

...and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenals...

The response is rather longish - so I've stuffed it in the Flash Traffic/Extended Entry.

Not weaponize space. Okay. I'm fine with that. S'long as nobody else does. Of course, several nations who's interests don't align with ours consider our satellite constellations to already have weaponized space. Going to take down the comms and recon satellites, Senator? Those are warfighting enablers that make the American way of war possible. And therefore, they are legitimate targets of people who wish us harm. Just thinkin' out loud, sir.

Slowing FCS is already happening. Welcome to the cart, Senator. Of course, he probably means "any future system developed for combat," not just FCS proper. One wonders if that would include the next generation of vehicles designed to better protect soldiers - even in "peace-keeping" missions. The devil is in them details. And soundbites do not good policy make.

Heh. Just what we need, another Board. Those functions already exist, Senator. Perhaps a tweak or two, rather than another layer? S'okay, sir. You get the job, there will be plenty of people who will brief you up on the stuff you don't know.

A world without nuclear weapons. Good luck with that. Nice words, tough genie.

Here's his issue paper on the subject:

Toward a Nuclear Free World: Obama will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons, and pursue it. Obama will always maintain a strong deterrent as long as nuclear weapons exist. But he will take several steps down the long road toward eliminating nuclear weapons. He will stop the development of new nuclear weapons; work with Russia to take U.S. and Russian ballistic missiles off hair trigger alert; seek dramatic reductions in U.S. and Russian stockpiles of nuclear weapons and material; and set a goal to expand the U.S.-Russian ban on intermediate- range missiles so that the agreement is global.

This is another one of those things that's too complicated for a sound bite. And these are high-minded words without much substance, since (sanely) he's not proposing to do much unless everybody else agrees to do it. Good luck, Senator. Enjoy those briefings. Mind you - if you can get everybody to load 'em up and dump 'em somewhere, fine with me. I never liked the things, and you are writing me monthly checks because of 'em.

Global ban on the development of fissile material? Greenies are going to love that. Might have some trouble with those nations who *like* nuclear power, though.

Summation: Lots of high-minded fluff, not much substance. Such is what we can expect in a sound bite world. It's so amorphous he can do almost anything, and claim he's met the promise. Love to see his serious policy papers on the subject, when he gets them done. Here's his stuff for the military:

Building a 21st Century Military

The Problem: The excellence of our military is unmatched. But as a result of a misguided war in Iraq, our forces are under pressure as never before. Obama will make the investments we need so that the finest military in the world is best-prepared to meet 21st-century threats.

"The excellence of our military is unmatched." Can't be true if we've lost the war, sir, and need to come home immediately. If the latter is the case, then we've been over-matched by a melange of loosely organized militias, terrorists, hostile media and elites, supported by politicians hungry for domestic power, and your plan should suggest some concrete ideas about how we are going to totally re-structure our services in order to be able to succeed in that kind of environment. Not just tweaks and twiddles.

Rebuild Trust: Obama will rebuild trust with those who serve by ensuring that soldiers and Marines have sufficient training time before they are sent into battle.

More detail, please.

Expand the Military: We have learned from Iraq that our military needs more men and women in uniform to reduce the strain on our active force. Obama will increase the size of ground forces, adding 65,000 soldiers to the Army and 27,000 Marines.

I won't argue this, if we also do some restructuring in organizing for combat. And peace keeping. And peace enforcing. And foreign disaster relief. And nation building. And all those other things we like to send soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, and Guardsmen and Reservists to do... Or, we rationalize our mission sets, and, dare I say it, take an appetite suppressant on changing the world?

New Capabilities: Obama will give our troops new equipment, armor, training, and skills like language training. He will also strengthen our civilian capacity, so that our civilian agencies have the critical skills and equipment they need to integrate their efforts with our military.

So, again, that "unmatched military" is really poorly equipped, under-protected, badly trained? I'm with you on the language skills. Good luck guessing on which ones we're going to need 10 years from now. That's true for *whoever* sits in the Oval Office and the E-Ring. Mind you, I'm all for improvements, but we do have to remember that "Perfect is the enemy of Good Enough" and accept the fact that the bad guy always gets a vote. Therefore, if we're going to stay in the business of killing people and breaking things - the people we're killing and who's stuff we're breaking, are going to try to hurt us back. And they'll succeed. Mind you, this group has had less comparative success than about anyone else who's tried, though we just can't seem to get our minds around that concept. Additionally, trying to make it casualty-free for our side will cost you in other ways. So many other ways. Such as making it way too easy to go to war. But all that stuff is too much for an already long blog post.

Gonna take on the Civil Service! I'll sign up for that. Long past time it needed doing. Go to school on the changes DoD has made in the civil service. Mind you, I want *all* the candidates to sign on to this one.

Strengthen Guard and Reserve: Obama will restore the readiness of the National Guard and Reserves. He will permit them adequate time to train and rest between deployments, and provide the National Guard with the equipment they need for foreign and domestic emergencies. He will also give the Guard a seat at the table by making the Chief of the National Guard a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

...thus ineffectively making the National Guard a separate service. Sort of. But not really. I would argue for a rather more far-reaching look at the organization of the DoD from a more holistic perspective. But that's just me, a retired mid-grade officer, with no experience in the rarefied atmosphere of the Pentagon or White House. Though I did spend an hour there, once, as a invited guest.

Over at Blackfive, Deebow takes a rather more detailed, and harsher, view.