{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019308943089430895, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.655405405405405, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
National Security: Organizing the Armed Forces

How does the U.S. constitutional system affect this country's ability to organize its armed forces? The primary impact of the system on the issues associated with organizing the armed services seems to be the inability of the United States to create a security apparatus with a truly national perspective. The result of this fragmented national security system has been an organizational and decision-making process that reflects the incomplete centralization of authority over the military. Incomplete centralization, in turn, allows the perspectives of the individual services to dominate the institutional environment and control-to a considerable degree-the functions and structure of the armed forces. More important, incomplete centralization and service dominance detract from the nation's ability to carry out the critical functions of strategic planning and advice, resource allocation, force structuring, and joint operations.