The White House administration is preparing itself for the most comprehensive review of U.S. defense policy since the Cold War.

At stake: striking a balance between continuing to be at the highest level of military preparedness and avoiding wasteful and unnecessary spending.

Does our nation need to keep a force of 1.45 million troops ready for military conflict?

Does the U.S. need to be large enough to be capable of engaging in two major campaigns “nearly simultaneously?”

How does the Pentagon take advantage of modern technology to improve its weaponry?

Ethically, should we even be in the business of improving our weaponry?

What elements of our defense system are growing outdated? Do Tomahawk missiles make the use of tanks and other infantry weapons obsolete?

Will scaling back our military cost Americans jobs?

Obviously, striking a balance between military preparedness and freeing up government funds for other ventures such as education, crime prevention, health care, etc., is the ideal goal for which the administration should strive.

Efforts to balance the federal budget are going to conflict with the unfortunate need to maintain national defense.

It is heartening, however, to see the commitment of the administration to reflect on the military’s direction and function as we head into the next millennium.

We seem to have left behind the spend-thrift days of the 1980s when more wasn’t enough and being able to blow up the world just once was too few.

We still are in possession of weaponry capable of eliminating life on this planet, but maybe, with time to reflect on the destructive power we hold, we’ve developed a more evolved conscience?

We’ll see.