The U.S. military will continue - with some modification: * Maintaining a high-quality all-volunteer force and "keeping faith" with today's active-duty force while stabilizing longerterm costs. * Sustaining a safe, secure and effective nuclear deterrent force, although elements of the 2010 package such as the plutonium facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory are slipping to the right. * Preventing and countering nuclear proliferation and terrorism. * Rapidly projecting global power utilizing forward-deployed forces, although two brigades are being permanently withdrawn from Europe, largely driven by domestic base-closure politics. The nation's strategy should be robust enough to withstand relatively small variations in the resources committed to its execution. Since previous defense drawdowns after Korea, Vietnam and the Cold War were much larger (25 to 50 percent) than even the combination of BCA and sequestration cuts, does this mean that the nation will have three to five different strategies if the post-9/1 1 drawdown is of similar magnitude?