[lbo-talk] Running out of troops worldwide

[Max B. Sawicky]

The answer to Dennis' point I think is that this data
disproves the premise that the U.S. is on an expansionist
binge, insofar as this means conquest followed by occupation.
It doesn't have the political will to field a force of sufficient
size for that enterprise.  All it can do is kill lots of people
from 10,000 feet.  At this point a draft or a significant
expansion of recruitment would be a confession of failure
by the Administration.  Only a huge terrorist attack could
change that.

The other side of the coin is that the occupations of Iraq
& Afghanistan could progress very badly for the U.S., and
Bush.  If memory serves, 23 Americans have been killed since
May 1.

mbs


>
> James Dobbins, who played a leading role in the US nation-building efforts
> in Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo and Afghanistan as President Clinton's
> and President George W. Bush's special envoy . . . says the current force
> level of about 175,000 is insufficient and estimates that a more realistic
> level is about 300,000.  If the US had to provide almost all of those
> forces itself, the effect on American military resources would be
> catastrophic.  With rotation in and out of the hteatre, that would mean
> almost a million soldiers largely committed to Iraq, says Mr Dobbins --
> virtually the US army's entire strength.  Pengtagon officials dispute
> these numbers, but acknowledge that the Iraq commitment will strain US
> assets.
>
> <unquote>
>
> Michael

You'd think, with Iran and perhaps Syria in the offing (not to mention Cuba,
Venezuela and Colombia), that this would point to the reactivation of the
draft. Millions are registered -- why not? Would Bush dare go against what's
become standard military belief, that you can't fight imperial wars with a
conscript military? If you wanna see resistance to Pax Americana, just wait
till the New Lottery begins . . .

DP

___________________________________
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk