Quote:
Originally posted by Centurion
Breaking my own rule not to respond to you anymore in this post:
Originally posted by theking
Here is a real scenario for you...that I believe to be true.
The Second World War ended 58 years ago...we have found the money to keep troops in Europe for 58 years...there are currently more troops in Europe that there are in Iraq.
WRONG! MANY MORE COMBAT TROOPS IN IRAQ THAN EUROPE!
COSTS MORE TO MAINTAIN THIS LEVEL OF COMBAT THAN PEACETIME EUROPE!
-------
The Second World War ended 58 years ago...we have found the money to keep troops in Asia for 58 years...there are currently almost as many troops in Asia as there are in Iraq.
WRONG! MANY MORE COMBAT TROOPS IN IRAQ THAN ASIA!
COSTS MORE TO MAINTAIN THIS LEVEL OF COMBAT THAN PEACETIME ASIA!
-----------
I suggest to you that we will find the money to keep troops in Iraq for 58 years...if we deem it to be necessary...and it will probably be deemed necessary...as historically the US maintains forces in an AO once they have been initially introduced.
SUGGESTIONS DON'T PAY FOR AMMO!
And just for the sake of argument..let's say you are RIGHT..that it costs more to maintain Euorpe AND Asia that it does currently in Iraq.
If that was true, over 50% of our total expenditures would go just for these 3 areas out of our entire budget.
Your world where there is unlimited money to finance whatever we deemed to be truely necessary does not exist.
|
Actually...I am wrong...I forgot to take into consideration the million man reduction in forces the US has had over the past few years...a slip of mind that has changed the force level equation.
The USEUCOM area of responsibility (AOR) covers more than 21 million square miles and includes 93 countries and territories. Several other countries and territories are considered to be part of our area of interest (AOI).
Approximately 116,400 American soldier, sailors, airmen and Marines are permanently assigned in Europe, Africa and Asia as part of the United States European Command.
The information is from the Department of Defense.
http://www.defenselink.mil/
I did not immediately find a link for the number of forces in the Iraqi Theater but I think it is being reported at around 145,000.
Thus I repeat we have found the money to keep substantial numbers of forces in Europe and in Asia (during the Cold War the numbers were double or triple the current level) for more than fifty years...and in addition fight two major conflicts (Korea for three years and we were involved in Vietnam for fourteen years in total). Our GNP is bigger than it has ever been but yet you think that we cannot maintain forces in what has been...up to this point in time...a minor egagement.
I would be interested in what you think is an alternative...and what you think the next President will do (if Bush is not re-elected)?