re: Let's talk about military spending

quote:

---

In this newer environment of smaller armies, what "pickles" could we end up in that couldn't be held steady for 60 days while current activated NG/Reserve unit gets ready and the Reserve/NG unit on deck moves up early?

---

Developed nations have smaller armies - the emerging threats - at least many of them - don't.

Defense is a lot stronger, too - so we can drop guys in before an invasion and probably be okay with limited support from an all reserve AF and the Naval/Marines forces in the area.

The problem would be dislodging someone. Yeah, the folks can wait until we get there, right? Unless it's Americans or allies and they're under the occupation of someone like Saddam Hussein or worse.

Whereas Saddam held Kuwait from August to February, under a very optimistic scenario with GT23's force structure - that's a 18 to 24 month operation - at a minimum. In fact, because it would be so slow and deliberative, I doubt we would even launch it at all.

So, there's that. If you're fine with us not being able to do that mission at all (which I'm neutral - that's a political decision), that should at least be a conscious choice.

I mean, we can't save the world, right?