Re: Re: (International Herald Tribune) Panel urges creatio...

[Guest guest]

Refer back to my post on Operation Restore Hope, the post is titled: Somalia on $5 a Day.

First, I think we would cut and run, just like we did from Somalia. All it would take is a few US soldiers killed and we'd be gone.

Second, we should learn that getting in the middle of someone else's civil war is a bad idea. Yes, it is tragic to see all these people getting killed, but these are hatreds that are centuries old. Unless we are willing to hang around in force for a few generations, we will accomplish nothing, and then maybe not even after that much time. In the 1900's US Marines were in Haiti for decades and made a little progress. However, as soon as they left, the country fell apart again.

If we go in with weak rules of engagement, like we did in Somalia (also Iraq), they locals will figure them out and use them to their advantage. I cover this in the other post.

Our military is at its limit now, really beyond the limit. Clinton cut the military by about a third under the idea of a 2 theatre war force. However, as many of his staff later admitted, they cut too much and it was not capable of fighting two wars at once, but only one, maybe. What we have now is the bulk of our military tied down in Iraq, but still not enough troops. For things to run properly, we would need 3 soldiers for every 1 in the field. This would allow one soldier to be deployed, one soldier to have downtown, special schools, etc, and one soldier to begin training to be deployed. Deployment tempo would be 6 to 9 months deployed with 1 to 2 years at home before next deployment. We don't have anything like that with soldiers having many deployments in that 2 year time.

This is hard on military equipment. Worse, it is hard on the men. Soldiers in Iraq are seeing more days of active combat that soldiers in WWII or Vietnam. Since the average soldier is only good for about 200 days of combat, many get worn out on their first tour. It is small wonder that we are seeing such an increase in Shell Shock (PTSD) and other problems. More time away from the battlefield, along with knowing that they will have more time away from it would go a long way toward cutting those cases.

Simply put, if we are going to try to prevent genocide, provide humanitarian aid, protect refugee camps and get back into the nation building game, we are going to need a much larger military with a much larger budget. It would probably require reinstating the draft, because I don't think we could get enough troops otherwise. It would be one thing if we were attacked and in another big war, like WWII, but just for peacekeeping, no way would we get the troops by volunteering alone. Maybe mercenary groups would do the job, but that would be expensive in itself and, given US history, we would probably cut them loose in the combat zone, stranding them there, which would be the end of mercenaries working for the US.

The question I have is, will the new administration be willing to stay the course when genocide comes into play, or will they pull a Clinton.Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and favorite sites in one place. Try it now.

[Guest guest]

You're right. The military is too small for current operations (Iraq, Afghanistan, the Balkans, plus our existing treaty and alliance obligations) let alone another potential war with North Korea, China or whomever else. Putting troops into somewhere like Darfur might sound nice but it would be expensive in terms of men, machines and cash. We are short on all three.

Another problem is that Darfur is inland. To supply them we would have to rely on the good graces of the Sudanese government and their neighbors. As we saw just recently in Pakistan, our supply bases can be hit. In Pakistan, it read like we were using local forces to protect the base, which was a mistake, but was done as a cost measure, them being cheaper than US troops. So, to protect supply bases in Sudan, we would need US or other allied troops that were more reliable. That means more expense. If we don't, then aircraft could be lost, which would endanger the troops further in country.

The logistical issues would be a nightmare.

I think the problem is that we're already in two conflicts and dealing with places like Darfur would put us in a third. Sad to say but we can't afford that as a country right now. We're held together by band-aids in my opinion.Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and favorite sites in one place. Try it now.