RE: http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,149653,00.html

"These numbers create a debt in both coins and soldiers that the American people don't seem willing to pay, judging from current recruiting troubles"

What recruiting troubles? I'm not seeing any recruiting troubles, aside from the fact that its occasionally unreasonably difficult to get someone in who wants to join.


MM1(SW), US Navy Recruiter, Michigan

Excellent article addressing an important issue. If the so-called GWOT is paramount to the safety and security of the United States and her friends and allies, then why is there a conspicuous absence of so-called coalition military forces engaged in Iraq? It seem that the coalition has always been comprised of at least 90% American and 10% other country forces. One simply has to look at casualty rates to see that the US experiences a disproportionate number of dead and wounded. If this war is a life and death struggle as Bush and company portrays it to be, then why don't our friends and allies take it seriously? Perhaps they see this war for what it really is - an imperial misadventure, being played out like a Shakespearean Tragedy by an inept US government.

The author seems to have a keen insight into some of the problems facing the American military in both the near and distant future. Whoever becomes the next president should take a close look at this lady and consider placing her in a position of importance.

Actually, it was not certain whether the writer was proposing that we cut back or increase -- probably, intentionally.

This is not the first time this game has been played. The earliest example similar to ours was the role of Athens just prior to and during the Peloponnesian War(s). Athens opted to carry the burden of heavy military expenditure in exchange for being the undisputed hegemon (except by the Spartans, who though they were better suited to that role). It ultimately turned out bad for Athens (mostly because they mismanaged it), and the western world plunged into a period of relative darkness. It is not clear that the Athenian idea itself was bad.

We can and should encourage others to share the burden. However, in this dangerous world, I wouldn't want anyone else to be number one. Call it extreme jingoism if you like; but at present, we are the best hope for the world -- if we do it right.

And that means, amongst other things, remaining strong militarily, economically, and above all spiritually/culturally, or whatever you want to call it.


The Europeans have lost too much to count on them for much, especially leadership. They still have their ancient tribal animosities. The EU, which is the latest of many attempts to revive the Roman Empire, is bureacratic, relatively undemocratic, and has the smaller members worried about being overrun by the traditional big bullies. They whined about our protection throughout the colde war, and they continue to whine (although Zarcosi and Merkel are refreshing and hopeful changes). Most of all, Europe is too set for long-term failure. Their population is aging and decreasing at the same time they have a ruinously expensive social welfare system -- which, in combination, will further decrease their ability to do for themselves, unless they change.

Well so much for all the rambling. The point of all this is that we should stay strong and not heed the whining of those that have lost whatever "mandate of Heaven" (a confucian concept) they may have once had.

Most nations today do not have enough troops on hand to guard their own borders let alone go to the aid of others. Sending them to the middle east or even to another European country doesn't make sense to them. Avoid war or disruption at any cost. Europe stands over hundred million more in population than the United States with far less military might. It's not only Europe that depends on the US, the gulf States has through the years took advantage of our fleet anchor off shore or the USAF stationed in the desert. Japan and Korea has in the past relied on American troops. Showing the flag began years before we became a super power.

Europe and others has developed into non-aggressive law abiding continent. Trouble being others do not ascribe to law courts preferring rather the bomb.

A recent story shows Europe is in need of energy. Their main sources starting to run dry in five years or less. Because a lack of strategic planning failed to evaluate how the loss of some EU countries will effect all the nations. Failing to look ahead, turning to the new oil producers of Africa they've yet to fill their shortfall. Germany, the largest industrialize nation, has been declined additional barrels by Russia on more than two occasions within the last several months. Europe would like to turn to the mideast more, including Iran, they find themselves in a dilemma trying to dicipline the unruly nation for nuclear weapons development while brokering a deal for oil.

As I see it, the American recruiters have to turn down a good percentage of those applying for the armed services in the US. In Europe there no incentive enough to draw them into services.

The US has been bearing the burden for far to long. We've provided world security for over 50 years and are hated for it. We were criticised even when we made the largest donation for humanitarian relief during the big Tsunami that struck in Indonesia and other asian countries. I don't have a solution to this problem. But we are certainly the suckers here. We can't scale back our operations (the ones that keep trade routes safe), and our "allies" benefit without contributing anything. The best thing for the US to do would be to reduce overseas exports as much as possible. That way, when China really rears its head in the Pacific, we'll have some infrastructure in place to make sure the US economy dosen't collapse. The day will come when the US can't maintain as strong a hold on the Pacific and European nations will just deal with China. We need to make moves towards self-sufficiency.

quote:

Originally posted by foxred03:
The US has been bearing the burden for far to long. We've provided world security for over 50 years and are hated for it. We were criticised even when we made the largest donation for humanitarian relief during the big Tsunami that struck in Indonesia and other asian countries. I don't have a solution to this problem. But we are certainly the suckers here. We can't scale back our operations (the ones that keep trade routes safe), and our "allies" benefit without contributing anything. The best thing for the US to do would be to reduce overseas exports as much as possible. That way, when China really rears its head in the Pacific, we'll have some infrastructure in place to make sure the US economy dosen't collapse. The day will come when the US can't maintain as strong a hold on the Pacific and European nations will just deal with China. We need to make moves towards self-sufficiency.

The bankrupt french did this (Totally Self Sustaining) after their revolution and within ten years they were back in the black. Now it's all about "Out Soursing and Cut Backs

Why even have NATO? I thought that was the answer to all of our problems...ONE common army in Europe so they don't have the means to kill each other every 20 years or so? So that when the French surrender, they surrender to..themselves?? Makes sense to me; anything so we do not have any more funeral ceremonies in Europe. Why, common money!!! What a concept!!! The US has had that since the Civil War, and it seems to work well; it made the "working girls" happy; the banks love it, and now you could move about without carrying your wealth in your teeth!! Need a beer, pull a tooth...need some "sugar," maybe a tooth and a half; I could go on and on, in the meantime, old toothless keeps on givin'...

GWB thinks HE is the savior of the world, appointed by HIS god to establish the new world order. We the sheep,follow him to the destruction he has planned, like lemmings to the sea. Our time in the sun has passed us by.

quote:

Originally posted by AFRet91:
GWB thinks HE is the savior of the world, appointed by HIS god to establish the new world order. We the sheep,follow him to the destruction he has planned, like lemmings to the sea. Our time in the sun has passed us by.

Actually, the President "believes" his mission is righteous and noble. The consequences are not planned destruction, rather more like unintended consequences. You know, like when you put your head in the sand. A truly dangerous situation, which we, the lemmings, have no say or control over. Have a good day!~!

quote:

Originally posted by SLDO:

quote:

Originally posted by AFRet91:
GWB thinks HE is the savior of the world, appointed by HIS god to establish the new world order. We the sheep,follow him to the destruction he has planned, like lemmings to the sea. Our time in the sun has passed us by.

Actually, the President "believes" his mission is righteous and noble. The consequences are not planned destruction, rather more like unintended consequences. You know, like when you put your head in the sand. A truly dangerous situation, which we, the lemmings, have no say or control over. Have a good day!~!

Ms. Roth-Douquet is a refreshing contributor to these op-ed pages. But the manpower issues may be victim of a self-fulfilling-prophecy dynamic set in motion by the last 6 years of US foreign policy and actions. To put it mildy... there might be some "blowback." As much as some folks would like to see an Americanization of the world, that dream like other grandiose ambitions is suffering a costly, deadly reality check. We might need the fortified Military but not for continuing the current misguided schemes that have us embedded in Iraq. We might need that Military not to direct "the new world order" but to respond to it.

Excellent article.

Our future Social Security and Medicare problems combined with our $9 trillion national debt guarantee that the U.S. will not be a major military power in about thirty years.

If you disagree with me, then explain where all the money is going to come from to fund our military, tax cuts, old folks, and debt payments.

USA has appointed itself Free World? Guardian & has created a self perpetuating Military monster.
So did Rome as one event inevitably led to another Greater Role.Pax Romanus evolved & lasted over 1000 years before it collapsed from decadence & internal decay. Our Administration has its own Agenda & does not neccessarily listen to its Allies but has created an expensive Pax Americanus which is self inflicted. We live in a different world now but Power hunger human nature does'nt change. Just hope we don't go "Broke" as the new World policeman? I would prefer to see USA as world Benefactor & more Humanitarian. Brit's had their go in 19th cent, America the 20th cent & it looks like China for 21st. Hopefully with some of its excess's drastically moderated. History does have a habit of repeating itself."Sorry" starting to "Waffle" !

Although well written, the writer has--dare I say an all too simplistic view--something neocons have been accused of?

First, to hold that we need new multilateral institutions to allow us to conduct global operations "pratically"---whatever that means, or "hobbling restrictions" again, whatever that means misses the point, because any new institutions will have rules, etc. governing the very issues she is criticizing. Certainly we can do better, and we should within the current framework, for this subtle swipe at the UN fails to answer the definitive questions, why is the US not working effectively with the United Nations before we break a country, which we failed ad nauseam in our pre and post invasion plans and actions. Instead we villify the UN to placate fascist neo cons while we so desperately need a muliltateral solution to Iraq.

Finally to brashly state that whether we stay in Iraq is not consequential gives me great pause. To say that an operation that costs us over 9 billion a month (exceeds the ANNUAL budgets of several agencies EPA, Security Admin, Commerce, Interior, Labor, etc) and at times over one or more of our nation's bravest everyday is--to be kind- a gross understatement of the highest order--certainly President Bush holds forth that solving the problem he created is inconsequential, after all he states he will leave that up to the next administration; now he can villify them and point fingers at the very mess he authored. Sadly, Iraq will remain consequential for decades.

America has been the bulwark of freedom for a long time for a great part of the world while our allies have always contributed less for many reasons (smaller military, less $, etc.)

But how can we continue to do so when we can't even efficiently meet our manning levels now, especially for the Army and Guard? And we certainly don't have shared-sacrifice from everyone here (i.e. draft.)

This "war" affects a small % of Americans, while the vast majority are immune to it. How much longer can we continue to operate this way, especially in light of the obscene costs?

quote:

Originally posted by AFRet91:
GWB thinks HE is the savior of the world, appointed by HIS god to establish the new world order. We the sheep,follow him to the destruction he has planned, like lemmings to the sea. Our time in the sun has passed us by.

With some, everything turns into a Bush bash!
Why not address the real problems we face and think like an American and not a political party?
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

We wouldn't have to go it alone so often if we were using our military for common, ethical and humanitarian purposes. No country believes we went into Iraq to topple a corrupt tyrant and free the Iraqi people. The American public doesn't even buy into this new rationale (post-WMD, nuclear proliferation and housing of training grounds for Al-Queda). When 9/11/01 happened much of the free world and others were willing to assist us because of the cowardly attack of rogue terrorists. What happened to that unified solidarity? Ask George, Dick, and Condi.

I agree! Iraq was ill conceived,Based on a lie,Badly planned, Irresponsible & unlike Afghanistan no world support.What was an irritation has become a major problem for many generations to come. The "Surge" was more of a surge for Al Quida recruits.Iran/Syria & now the Kurds all have ambitions & we have opened the gates for a major secular & bloody Oil power struggle through out the Middle East. Sunni, Shia, Jew, Christian & all the many sects in between. You can't get Rational decisions on Emotional subjects & Iraq has opened gate to a potential crazy Armaggeddon? which will make the Cold War seem easy! I will not just be contained in The Middle East. Been thru an Air Port lately?