This aphorism means that we must ensure that our military remains prepared to fight and win our nation's wars, but that it has the capacity to conduct peace operations when called upon to do so. We have learned that the key ingredients to a successful peace operation are well-trained and disciplined soldiers under the command of skilled, competent leaders acting within a clearly defined mandate. Our soldiers and Marines possess combat skills that are easily transferred to the needs of a peace operation, given the necessary time to adapt to the nature of the operation, its rules of engagement, and terms of reference. Experience has shown we can effectively prepare for peace operations because of the time required to craft a political mandate and identify force contributions. Relying on realistic training scenarios, he created a premier force capable of sustaining a highly fragile peace.
Some proponents support the earmarking of specialized forces.
We don't favor this approach because it limits our ability to respond to the many different contingencies our defense strategy requires of our military. While other nations embrace this practice, this is a luxury that we cannot afford, given the worldwide scope of our commitments. Whenever we put an American service member on the ground, the United States is making a political statement. We must be prepared to be challenged because opponents to the peace process will recognize that driving out the United States military will result in their success. American troops trained only as peacekeepers will not deal effectively with that situation.