DO YOU AGREE THAT The Army must have a strategic plan to compete with near peer adversaries in a multi-domain contested environment. Using old equipment that is not fast enough or technologically advance will not meet that mark. The shift from the SRM to the ReARMM sets the stage for the Army to focus on modernization of equipment for the "Army of 2035." The positives for this new system is an established timeline focused on the modernization of equipment to provide units predictability and specific timing in long range planning for new equipment training. However, this new cyclic system will only work if the fielding of equipment actually happens in the forecasted modernization timeline. The Army has a currently unstable political environment with Congress consistently passing continuing resolutions and DoD budgets barely passing by the deadlines. The year-by-year budgets do not allow for future forecasting and funding of new equipment fielding. Even if the equipment is funded, there is no guarantee that the equipment will actually be fielded in time as well. Delays from contractors in research, development, or production can cause a shift in the "predictable" ReARMM cycle. In closing, for my opinion, the Army ReARMM cycle was needed