On your comment about England, Germany, and South Korea: Please keep in mind that Bush's plan specifically calls for bringing home 100,000 military family members. You note correctly that tours in South Korea tend to be unaccompanied, which means that most of the 100,000 family members would come from Europe (hence my focus on Europe in the piece.) Part of my public diplomacy argument is that living among the people of another nation is qualitatively different from other forms of exchange in ways that uniquely enhance public diplomacy. You're right that this is ancillary to the military mission, but my argument is that it's sufficiently beneficial to American interests that it ought not be ignored.

The Feith/Bush argument that this will improve quality of life for military families is, frankly, an election-year sham. First, most military families strongly desire overseas assignments. Relatively low host-nation cost of living (with the exception of Japan) combined with generous COLA makes the money and lifestyle great, DoD schools are some of the best there are, and there's a strong "see the world" factor. Therefore, to the extent that this reduces postive opportunities for military families, this diminishes their quality of life. Moreover, the notion that they'll have more time with their uniformed family member is pure speculation. If troops are training at unaccompanied bases overseas but their families are stationed in the US -- where before they were living and training with their families overseas -- that means more time apart.

Best,

David