One of my students saw my last article on writing book reviews and asked, “I have some overdue homework. How do you write a detailed point paper?”
Naturally, I started thinking: what if someone like President Trump or Elon Musk called me up and said, “Hey, Scott! Can you help us improve government efficiency?”
Why Trump? Well, love him or hate him, he’s never been afraid of bold, sometimes out-there ideas.
And me? I live for out-there ideas.
So here we are. This article includes a full sample point paper—bells, whistles, and all—with my own personal spin. I’ve also tossed in an editorial, a few sample letters to politicians (because why not?), and a peek behind the curtain at how I’d tackle a serious policy issue with just the right blend of substance and creative flair.
And the issue? Improving America’s warfighting efficiency. My idea: consolidate all U.S. armed forces into a single unified “Guardforce.” The Navy would form the core, since it already includes its own Air Force (carriers), Army (Marines and SEALs), and Coast Guard (littoral ships). I’d roll in the Space Force too, cut Pentagon bureaucracy, and streamline command and control across the board.
Crazy? Maybe. Worth a look? Absolutely.
*****
THE POINT PAPER (and appendices)
Point Paper: Proposal for the Consolidation of U.S. Armed Forces into a Unified “Guardforce” and Relocation of Pentagon Operations
Title: Defense Synergy Plan: A Strategic Force Consolidation
Executive Summary
The Defense Synergy Plan presents a proposal for the consolidation of the U.S. Armed Forces into a single, unified military service, called Guardforce, designed to improve combat efficiency, reduce inter-service friction, and streamline operations. This plan will increase operational readiness, enhance coordination across branches, and simplify command structures. Additionally, the Pentagon will be replaced with a highly secure, underground facility to protect command and control operations from modern threats.
Purpose
The purpose of this proposal is to outline a bold, strategic initiative aimed at consolidating the various branches of the U.S. military into one unified force. This consolidation will foster greater coordination, reduce inefficiencies caused by redundant administrative layers, and maximize the operational capabilities of the U.S. military. By reducing bureaucratic barriers, we can increase readiness, responsiveness, and flexibility in the face of evolving global threats.
Problem Statement
The current structure of the U.S. Armed Forces, with separate branches for the Army, Navy, Air Force, Space Force, and Marines, presents several key issues:
• Bureaucratic Inefficiencies: Multiple, overlapping command structures lead to slow decision-making, miscommunication, and delays in response time during crises.
• Interoperability Issues: Each branch has specialized equipment, doctrine, and systems, which creates friction and logistical challenges during joint operations.
• Resource Redundancy: Duplication of efforts and infrastructure across branches results in higher operational costs and less effective resource allocation.
• Vulnerabilities: The Pentagon remains a primary target for modern threats such as ICBM strikes, EMP attacks, and cyberwarfare, which could cripple U.S. military command and control in the event of an attack.
Proposed Solution
To address these challenges, this proposal advocates for:
1. Creation of the Guardforce
The Guardforce would consolidate the Army, Navy, Air Force, Space Force, and Marines into a single, unified military service. The Navy would serve as the core of this force, as it already possesses significant capabilities in sea, air, and ground operations (e.g., Navy carriers, Marines, and Navy SEALs). This new structure would streamline command, reduce bureaucracy, and enhance interoperability. The program could be named FORCE (Fused Operations and Resources for Combat Efficiency), a designation that represents strength, unity, and the efficient utilization of military resources. The acronym emphasizes the goal of maximizing combat efficiency and operational strength through consolidation.
2. Relocation of Key Operations
Relocating personnel and operations from the Pentagon to a deep underground facility in a more secure location (e.g., Colorado or Nevada) would offer physical protection against modern warfare threats. This facility would be engineered to endure nuclear, EMP, and cyberattacks, ensuring that the U.S. military’s command structure remains operational during a significant national security threat. This relocation initiative could be termed NEXUS (National Evolution for Unified Strategic Forces), signifying a central, interconnected force capable of evolving and adapting to future challenges, integrating new technologies and forces for strategic advantage.
The Pentagon would be repurposed for a new, non-operational function, such as a national defense museum or intelligence analysis center, where it can act as a valuable resource for education, strategic research, or historical preservation. Its symbolic value as the heart of the nation’s military history should be maintained while modern operations are carried out in more secure environments.
Benefits of the Proposal
1. Enhanced Operational Efficiency
• Streamlined Command: A unified military command structure would reduce redundancies, improve coordination, and facilitate faster decision-making across all military domains.
• Improved Response Time: Eliminating inter-branch friction and creating joint task forces would enable faster and more effective responses to emerging threats.
• Increased Flexibility: Combining forces under one command would enhance the military’s ability to reallocate resources based on changing tactical and strategic needs.
2. Cost Savings
• The proposed consolidation would eliminate redundant infrastructure, streamline operations, and reduce the size of the Pentagon bureaucracy.
• The cost savings from eliminating duplication of effort and resources can be redirected to improve military technology, personnel training, and operational readiness.
3. Increased Security
• Underground Facility: Relocating the Pentagon to a more secure, underground facility would protect vital military operations from nuclear, cyber, and EMP threats.
• Continuity of Command: A hardened, underground facility would ensure that U.S. military leadership remains operational during and after a direct attack.
4. Technological Superiority
• The integration of various military domains (air, sea, land, and space) would foster the adoption of new technologies, such as AI-driven decision-making systems, space-based systems, and cutting-edge cyber capabilities.
• By consolidating resources and eliminating bureaucratic obstacles, the U.S. military would be able to more effectively develop and deploy advanced technologies.
Cost-Benefit Analysis
1. Initial Costs
• The initial investment required for consolidating the military and relocating operations would include:
• Reorganization and Integration: Costs associated with restructuring command structures, training personnel for new roles, and developing joint operational protocols.
• Construction of Underground Facility: Building a secure underground military headquarters would involve significant infrastructure costs, including hardened facilities, power and communication systems, and security measures.
2. Long-term Savings
• Reduced Duplication: The consolidation of the military branches would eliminate redundant infrastructure and services, resulting in long-term savings in equipment, personnel, and operational costs.
• Improved Operational Efficiency: Streamlined command and control would reduce delays, enhance mission effectiveness, and improve overall readiness.
3. Risk Management
• The potential risks include the logistical challenges of transitioning to a unified structure, training personnel in new roles, and managing the physical relocation of military operations. These risks can be mitigated through careful planning, phased implementation, and pilot programs.
Supporting Data & Case Studies
1. Historical Precedents: Similar military consolidations have been successful in other countries. For example, Germany’s Bundeswehr integrates land, air, and sea forces into a unified command structure, which has improved operational efficiency and interoperability.
2. Modern Military Examples: U.S. military operations such as the Navy’s Carrier Strike Groups and Joint Task Forces demonstrate the effectiveness of integrated, multi-domain operations.
3. Pentagon Vulnerability: The vulnerability of the Pentagon to modern threats, such as those demonstrated in the 9/11 attacks and recent cyber incidents, underscores the need for a more survivable command structure. Given its location, the Pentagon cannot guarantee the security necessary for continuity of operations in a modern, multi-threat warfare environment.
Next Steps & Action Plan
1. Phase 1: Feasibility Study
• Conduct a comprehensive feasibility study to assess the technical, logistical, and financial implications of consolidating the military branches and relocating operations to an underground facility. This study should include environmental impact assessments, construction timelines, and cost projections.
2. Phase 2: Pilot Program
• Identify one or two military branches or commands to serve as a pilot program for the consolidation and relocation effort. This would allow for testing of the concept and identification of potential issues before full implementation.
3. Phase 3: Legislative Support
• Engage with key stakeholders in Congress, the Department of Defense, and military leaders to gather support for the initiative. Work with legislators to draft the necessary legislation to authorize the consolidation and funding.
Conclusion
The Guardforce proposal offers a bold, strategic vision for the future of the U.S. military. By consolidating forces, eliminating redundant infrastructure, and relocating key operations to a secure underground facility, the U.S. military can improve operational efficiency, enhance security, and ensure that it remains a global leader in defense capabilities. This proposal is not just a modernization effort, but a proactive approach to safeguarding national security in an increasingly complex and volatile global environment.
Prepared by: Scott Azmus
Date: 8 April 2025
Addenda:
1. Considerations & Analysis
2. Cost Comparison
3. Guardforce Command Structure
Addendum One: Considerations & Analysis of the Guardforce Consolidation Plan
This section outlines the potential arguments and counterarguments to ensure a comprehensive understanding and careful consideration of the proposed plan. The intent is to show that all angles of the consolidation have been evaluated to maximize efficiency and minimize potential risks.
1. Arguments For the Guardforce Consolidation
a. Streamlined Command and Control
• Argument: Consolidating forces under a single unified command structure will enhance decision-making speed and eliminate bureaucratic inefficiencies inherent in the current multi-branch system.
• Supporting Evidence: Historical examples, such as the unification of military operations during major conflicts, demonstrate how unified commands reduce delays and confusion on the battlefield.
• Benefit: This will result in faster deployment, faster strategic decision-making, and more effective coordination during military operations.
b. Increased Interoperability
• Argument: The integration of the Navy, Army, Air Force, Space Force, and Cyber units into one unified force will increase operational synergy and cross-branch interoperability, reducing mission misalignments.
• Supporting Evidence: Current interoperability challenges, such as communication gaps and coordination problems between different military services, could be minimized under a single command structure.
• Benefit: Forces will operate more cohesively, improving combat efficiency and reducing the risk of operational failure.
c. Cost Efficiency
• Argument: By eliminating redundant administrative layers and streamlining logistics, personnel management, and support systems, the Guardforce consolidation could lead to significant cost savings.
• Supporting Evidence: Analysis of corporate mergers and consolidations shows how streamlining operations can reduce overhead costs.
• Benefit: The funds saved could be reinvested into enhancing technological capabilities or improving soldier welfare.
2. Counterarguments Against the Guardforce Consolidation
a. Loss of Service-Specific Culture
• Counterargument: Each branch of the military has a long-standing tradition, specialized culture, and unique approach to operations. Consolidating them could lead to the loss of these identities, potentially causing morale issues.
• Response: While the culture of each branch is important, the Guardforce would maintain specialized units within each domain, preserving those distinct cultures while enhancing overall synergy.
b. Increased Risk of Centralized Decision-Making
• Counterargument: A single unified command structure may lead to overly centralized decision-making, reducing autonomy and potentially slowing down decisions for specialized operations.
• Response: The Guardforce would incorporate regional and tactical commanders who have a deep understanding of their specific domains, ensuring decentralized decision-making within a unified framework.
c. Complexity of Integration
• Counterargument: Merging different branches with unique command structures, procedures, and technologies could be a difficult and time-consuming process, potentially hindering initial effectiveness.
• Response: A phased integration plan, guided by experienced change management experts, will ensure that the transition is smooth and that challenges are addressed incrementally over time.
3. Pros of the Guardforce Consolidation
a. Unified Vision and Direction
• Pro: One central leadership structure would ensure that all branches are working toward the same overarching mission, reducing confusion and duplication of effort.
• Benefit: This alignment would enhance long-term strategic planning and execution of defense policies.
b. Enhanced Combat Effectiveness
• Pro: Consolidation would allow for more efficient and responsive combat units that are cross-functional and can deploy rapidly across multiple domains.
• Benefit: This would provide the U.S. military with a competitive edge in modern, multi-domain warfare.
c. Future-Proofing the Military
• Pro: As warfare evolves, particularly with the growth of cyber and space operations, a unified force would be better equipped to handle emerging threats and technologies.
• Benefit: This would prepare the Guardforce for future challenges, ensuring readiness for operations in space, cyberspace, and advanced technological warfare.
4. Cons of the Guardforce Consolidation
a. Potential Political Resistance
• Con: Some political leaders or military leaders may resist the consolidation due to the loss of power or influence within individual branches.
• Mitigation: A robust public relations campaign and clear communication of the benefits to national security and military effectiveness would help overcome this resistance.
b. Initial Transition Costs
• Con: The initial process of consolidation could incur upfront costs, including reorganization efforts, retraining, and technological integration.
• Mitigation: These costs would be offset over time by increased efficiency and cost savings in the long run, as noted in earlier cost-benefit analyses.
c. Risk of Oversight Challenges
• Con: A single command structure could become overburdened with too many responsibilities, making it difficult to oversee all areas of military operations effectively.
• Mitigation: Strategic delegation and division of responsibilities among specialized operational heads will ensure that the Guardforce can manage its expansive scope while avoiding bureaucratic logjams.
Conclusion
This addendum outlines the key considerations surrounding the Guardforce consolidation plan. By presenting both the benefits and potential challenges, we ensure that the proposal is well-rounded and demonstrates thorough thought. The responses to the counterarguments highlight how these challenges can be mitigated, ensuring a smoother implementation and maximizing the long-term benefits for the U.S. military’s efficiency, effectiveness, and future readiness.
*****
THE OPINION EDITORIAL
Op-Ed: The Future of U.S. Defense: Unifying for Strength and Security
In a rapidly changing global landscape where national security is more critical than ever, the U.S. must evolve its military infrastructure to meet new challenges head-on. Today, I am excited to introduce a visionary proposal that promises not only to reshape the structure of the U.S. Armed Forces but to fortify our defense capabilities for the future: the creation of a unified military force, the Guardforce, and the relocation of Pentagon operations to a more secure underground facility.
The Need for Change
The current multi-branch system of the U.S. military — Army, Navy, Air Force, Space Force, and Marines — while historically effective, has become increasingly inefficient in the face of modern warfare. Bureaucratic layers, redundant structures, and logistical challenges have slowed our response times and complicated joint operations. Additionally, the Pentagon, a symbol of American strength, remains a prime target for modern threats like cyberattacks, nuclear strikes, and electromagnetic pulses (EMPs). If our command center is compromised, it could cripple our military’s ability to react in a time of crisis.
The answer? A unified military service — the Guardforce —consolidates all military branches into a single, highly coordinated entity. With the Navy serving as the core, integrating air, ground, and space operations, we will create a seamless force capable of responding to any threat swiftly and effectively.
Why Guardforce?
1. Streamlined Command Structure: By consolidating operations under one unified command, we eliminate the bureaucratic inefficiencies that slow decision-making and create friction between branches. A streamlined structure will foster faster, more effective responses and ensure that every soldier, sailor, airman, and Marine is working toward the same overarching mission.
2. Improved Interoperability: Different branches currently operate with distinct technologies and doctrines, often creating misalignments. The Guardforce would foster cross-branch synergy, enabling more cohesive and efficient operations across all domains of warfare: land, sea, air, and space.
3. Security and Resilience: Relocating key Pentagon operations to a secure underground facility will protect our command structure from cyberattacks, EMPs, and nuclear threats. This ensures that our leadership remains intact in any scenario, ready to steer the nation through crisis.
4. Cost Efficiency: A consolidated structure would eliminate duplicative infrastructure, reducing overhead costs and enabling reinvestment in cutting-edge technologies that will keep our military at the forefront of defense innovation.
The Path Forward
The Guardforce proposal is not just a reorganization; it’s a new way of thinking about our defense capabilities. It’s an acknowledgment that the challenges we face today — and in the future — require unity, agility, and innovation. This plan is designed to propel us into the next era of military excellence.
As we look to the future, the Guardforce will give us the flexibility to respond to emerging threats across multiple domains. From cyberattacks to space warfare, we cannot afford to remain bogged down by outdated structures. Now is the time to unite, to strengthen our forces, and to secure our future.
I encourage lawmakers, military leaders, and citizens alike to rally behind this transformative proposal. Together, we can build a military that is stronger, faster, and more secure than ever before.
Scott Azmus
Defense Analyst & Strategist
*****
SAMPLE LETTERS:
1. Senator Ron Johnson, U.S. Senate, 328 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Johnson,
I hope this letter finds you well. As a constituent deeply concerned about our nation’s defense capabilities, I am writing to present a strategic proposal that aligns with our nation’s need for innovative national security strategies. Enclosed is a point paper that proposes merging the Army, Navy, Air Force, Space Force, and Marines into one integrated entity. By reducing inefficiencies, this consolidation would improve coordination, speed, and decision-making. Additionally, it proposes relocating the Pentagon’s command operations to a secure underground facility to protect against threats like nuclear attacks, EMPs, and cyberwarfare.
The key benefits of this proposal include:
• Enhanced Operational Efficiency: A unified command structure that ensures faster, more effective responses to national security threats.
• Cost Savings: Streamlined operations and reduced redundancies, with savings reinvested into military technology and personnel development.
• Increased Security: Relocation of vital operations to a fortified underground facility to safeguard command functions during a national crisis.
• Technological Superiority: Accelerated adoption of cutting-edge technologies for military operations across all domains—land, sea, air, and space.
I believe this proposal will enhance U.S. military readiness and security and prepare us for current and future challenges. Thank you for your time and consideration of this critical initiative.
Sincerely,
Scott Azmus
Attachment: Point Paper on “Defense Synergy Plan: A Strategic Force Consolidation.”
#
2. President Donald J. Trump, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, D.C. 20500 AND Mr. Elon Musk, Special Government Employee, Department of Government Efficiency, The White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear President Trump and Mr. Musk,
I trust this letter finds you both in good health and high spirits. I am writing to present a strategic proposal that I believe aligns with your forward-thinking approaches to national security and technological innovation. Enclosed is a point paper that offers a visionary framework for the consolidation of the U.S. Armed Forces into a unified military service called Guardforce, designed to streamline operations, improve combat readiness, and fortify national security.
The primary focus of this proposal is the creation of a consolidated military force that will merge the Army, Navy, Air Force, Space Force, and Marines into one integrated entity. This consolidation would significantly reduce the inefficiencies caused by the current fragmented structure, enhancing operational coordination, speed, and decision-making. The plan also proposes the relocation of the Pentagon to a highly secure, underground facility to safeguard our military command and control systems against evolving threats such as nuclear strikes, EMP attacks, and cyberwarfare.
Key benefits of this proposal include:
• Enhanced Operational Efficiency: A streamlined command structure will foster better coordination and faster responses, improving overall military effectiveness.
• Cost Savings: Reducing redundant infrastructure and personnel across branches will yield significant cost savings, which can be reinvested into cutting-edge military technology and personnel development.
• Increased Security: The relocation of military operations to a fortified underground facility will protect vital command functions in the event of a national crisis.
• Technological Superiority: A unified military force will accelerate the adoption of next-generation technologies, enhancing capabilities across all domains—land, air, sea, and space.
The vision behind this proposal is to not only enhance U.S. military readiness but also ensure that our defense infrastructure is resilient and adaptable in the face of modern and future threats. As two leaders with a proven track record of pushing boundaries and redefining industries, I believe that your leadership can be instrumental in shaping the future of national defense.
I would be honored if you could take the time to review the attached point paper. As the goals outlined in this proposal align with your broader strategies for innovation, security, and global leadership, I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this ambitious and necessary initiative.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Scott Azmus
Attachment: Point Paper on “Defense Synergy Plan: A Strategic Force Consolidation”
*******
DONE!
If you’re still with me—bless your heart. You’ve survived policy proposals, bureaucratic acrobatics, imaginary letters to powerful people, and at least one acronym no one needed.
Whether you’re nodding in agreement, shaking your head in disbelief, or just here for my weird letter to the White House, I hope this little exercise in strategic absurdity sparked a thought or two.
Plus you’ve seen a point paper.
Who knows—maybe someday someone will call me up and say, “Hey, Scott… let’s fix this thing.” Until then, I’ll be here, dreaming big, writing weird, and making charts no one asked for.
But I bet the REAL call from Washington D.C. will come when the alien starship enters our star system!