Following the events of Sept. 11, the U.S. government has had a keen awareness of the risks posed by international terrorist groups, but it is divided over whether the military should be restructured in order to better respond to those threats. One major element of that dilemma has been the funding. With the Pentagon already engaged in expensive, armed conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, two countries invaded by U.S.-led forces as part of the war on terrorism, many wonder whether the U.S. can afford to implement major reforms in its military ranks. Since there is no clear answer to that question, efforts to institute far-reaching structural and policy changes in the U.S. military have divided many within Congress, the Pentagon and the defense industry, which produces the equipment and weapons used by the U.S. military.
Supporters of military transformation include Bush, many prominent members of his administration, high-ranking officials in the Pentagon, members of Congress and a number of firms within the defense industry. They collectively argue that, due to the war on terrorism, conditions are right for reforming the military for the 21st century.