Charles Hoskinson, Politico

President Barack Obama talked tough Thursday as he announced his new defense strategy, vowing that he would not allow the nation’s budget troubles to disrupt its military superiority.

But his unprecedented trip to the Pentagon’s briefing room risks exposing him to a charge Republicans have so far been unable to make stick — that Obama is weak on national security — just as the presidential campaign kicks into high gear.

The strategy lays out in broad terms a blueprint for a smaller, tech-savvy force that’s capable of confronting terrorists around the world while still maintaining a presence in the Middle East, deterring the nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea, and countering a rising China in the western Pacific. Using one of his favorite phrases, “the tide of war is receding,” Obama said the strategy would build on the successes of ending the war in Iraq, winding down fighting in Afghanistan and putting Al Qaeda “on the path to defeat.”

The president’s rhetoric — and the optics of being surrounded by the nation’s military leadership while announcing the new strategy — was the latest signal of his administration’s confidence that it has outflanked Republicans on national security. It echoed his remarks last month that his critics should “ask Osama bin Laden and the 22-out-of-30 top Al Qaeda leaders who’ve been taken off the field whether I engage in appeasement.”

But the devil is always in the details, and when the administration next month lays out its specific plans for reducing planned military spending by at least $450 billion over 10 years, the public can evaluate whether the new strategy matches the reality of shrinking defense budgets. There’s also the widespread concern in the defense industry, loudly echoed by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, that deeper reductions will cause the ailing U.S. economy to shed even more jobs — a worry that ties defense spending to the hottest issue in the fall campaign.

While the broad goals may make sense, “theoretical arguments about concepts are just that until the department releases tangible force plans, manpower plans, and procurement plans, and shows how U.S. forces and force capabilities will change by mission and deployment,” said veteran military analyst Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Those detailed plans could give ammunition to GOP candidates seeking to make Obama’s national security strategy an issue if the situation deteriorates in Iraq and Afghanistan or other trouble spots, and the military isn’t equipped to handle the fallout.

Though U.S. troops have withdrawn from Iraq, the country’s political environment remains in turmoil. In Afghanistan, the administration is betting heavily on peace talks with the Taliban and the ability of Afghan government forces to take over by 2014. Iran’s nuclear program continues despite sanctions, raising the specter of an Israeli strike that could inflame the entire Persian Gulf. And Al Qaeda, though weakened, is still trying to attack the United States.