- Under the cost-cutting plan, the army will be down to 450,000 soldiers at the end of the 2017 budget year, even though in 2013 it argued in budgetary documents that going below 450,000 troops might mean it could not win a war, USA Today said.
On the one hand, hopefully this means fewer wars of adventure for the USA... On the other hand, the world has had a relatively peaceful period since the end of WW2 in part because of US military hegemony...
Thoughts?
I have this utopian vision of being able to look back on this period of time as the tumultuous beginning of the end of powerful national militaries. In this utopia, military forces exist primariliy as a international coalition body tasked with the total elimination of groups like I-fuck-goats-sis, Boko Haram, etc. Maybe really antagonistic countries hold onto their (decreased) nuclear arsenal as a deterrent to other equally antagonistic countries, but by and large fissile material is used to build and supply reactors to start a massive desalination campaign anywhere it's needed.
I'm really hopeful that disarmament will result in some sort of international task force. Unfortunately it seems like the reaction to USA's military reductions is increased investment in national militaries by US allies in regions with instability (saudi arabia, phillipines, japan, and eastern Europe come to mind). The US military has been used to do a lot of harm, but I wish we were replacing US disarmament with something better rather than just creating a hole for other nations to fill.
Not only is it constant war, but it's a consumer war. Here in America, we are force fed this "Defend Freedom" rhetoric, while ignoring the people who live on this land who are in desperate need of some Freedom. Americans need to free themselves from the complex that has kept us invested in conflicts across the globe. I know we see ourselves as the "global-police", but it's time to take our priorities back to our people. I support the troops who do "defend our freedom", but I'll be fucked if going to war again means we are denied basic human rights here at home because we don't have the money.
Not sure. USA has been almost constantly at war since its inception. Many of the wars were for exploitation of native population and resources or outright conquest. But there have also been wars, especially recently, where the USA has been acting as the military might to enforce international law. It's usually in the USA's interest to maintain international peace, especially in economies that are open to globalization. But counterexamples abound... What other factors might have resulted in the current era of relative peace? Luck?
The US Army is continually increasing the amount of effectiveness one soldier provides. My feeling is that they have done the math and know that in a few years time that they will be back at the current 'strength' with just some of the improvements in drone warfare and other kinds of technological advancements.
I see all these comments about the US being the world police and what not. But here is my question, what will happen to those 57,000 people that will be out of a job?
The same thing that's happening to everyone else that's going to be out of work soon because of technology. Some will find new jobs and prosper, some will eke out an existence, some will descend into poverty and probably addiction and madness based on the track record so far.