The Pentagon

[The Duke]

Atlasia no longer has any military interest in Europe.

We don't just have abses in areas where we have a vested interest.  We also have bases in areas that allow us to more quickly deploy to those areas where we have a vested interest.  For example, we have big airbases in Britain, Germany, and italy which help us more easily deploy our people to and get them our of the Middle East.  We have naval stations so ships in the Mediterrenean (which patrol near Libya, Lebanon, Israel, and Egypt) can easily re-supply.  If we withdraw all assets in Europe, then we won't be able to do things so simple as medical evacuations from Iraq to hospitals in Germany.

Oh, and I forgot: The Balkans!  Hello!

[The Duke]

Somewhere in thea rchives is my old pentagon thread where I suggest doing essentially what Jake said.  Maintain troops in the Balkans, deployment related facilities in Europe, and bring the two heavy divisions in Germany home.

[The Duke]

Given that Jake's central complaint was that you shouldn't close bases like Ramstein, I don't think closing bases like Ramstein can be considered a compromise from Jake's perspective.  I appreciate that my point about the Balkans was taken seriously, but its still a little worrisome that such an oversight was made.

Were there even any diplomatic feelers to see how crucial allies would react to this?  Hell, did True Dem even get notified before you issued the press release?

[The Duke]

It's the retraining of 60,000 heavy troops into elite special forces light infantry that gets me the most.

It makes no sense whatsoever.

[The Duke]

And finally the third position in this plan is absolutely horrible. I believe that under John Ford's duration as SoD the amount of personnel in Iraq was greatly increased in order to try and stabilize the country. Adding another 65,000 men to the country would be a waste.

Clarification:  We were going to, and had expanded the size of the military by four divisions to do exactly this, but PB was voted out before we could actually put extra guys in Iraq.

[The Duke]

Look, folks.  Last time I checked we aren't facing the same kind of threats that we did in the Cold War era.  To meet the threats of the 21st century, we're gonna need more Anti-Terrorist units, more Airborne units, more light infantry, more behind the enemy lines units, and less heavy infantry, less units that take months to deploy in a huge invasion.  I am not, however, suggesting the we should lower the standards for Special Forces training.  It will remain as rigorous as ever and the units will still be small self-sufficient teams.

Two of the last three wars we've fought involved heavy armored units blitzing through open desert and engaging enemy armored divisions.

[The Duke]

Look, folks.  Last time I checked we aren't facing the same kind of threats that we did in the Cold War era.  To meet the threats of the 21st century, we're gonna need more Anti-Terrorist units, more Airborne units, more light infantry, more behind the enemy lines units, and less heavy infantry, less units that take months to deploy in a huge invasion.  I am not, however, suggesting the we should lower the standards for Special Forces training.  It will remain as rigorous as ever and the units will still be small self-sufficient teams.

Two of the last three wars we've fought involved heavy armored units blitzing through open desert and engaging enemy armored divisions.

Yes, but tanks are less of a threat today then guerillia warfare.  That is why we must train more of our troops to fight in guerillia warfare type situations.  Anyway, I was saying retrain heavy infantry, nor Armored Units.

Just because we're facing geurillas instead of tanks in Iraq, doesn't mean that tanks aren't a threat.  It is a classic error by military planners to assume that the conflict in which they are embroiled today will be the kind of conflict that we face in the next war and every war after that.  The smart thing is not to re-structure the entire force to re-fight the Iraq war over and over again because no war will be exactly like the Iraq war ever again.  The smart thing is to retain the ability to fight many different kinds of wars at whatever time we're asked to.  If we get rid of everything except light infantry, we'll become one dimensional and ultimately unable to defend the country against any threat other than the one we face at this exact second.  I also think you underestimate the importance of heavy units in defeating geurilla forces.  Tanks and artillery play a key role in this kind of conflict.