Is A Smaller U.S. Global Presence A Good Thing?

A SOLDIER'S QUESTION - A U.S. Army soldier from Task Force Ramrod raises his hand to ask U.S. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates a question on a forward operating base in Afghanistan, June 6, 2011. DOD photo by Cherie Cullen

Should The U.S. Welcome A Smaller Global Presence? -- DoD Buzz

Many Washington commentators dread the coming of Austerity America; they mourn what they fear will be the passing of America’s global reach and the apogee of its power. Not Christopher Preble of the Cato Institute, whose column in Defense News seems to celebrate what he argues will be a needed rebalancing of American military power with that of the rest of the world.

Read more ....

My Comment: America's economic crisis is getting worse, so even if there is the political will in Washington to not downsize the U.S. military, the economic situation is presenting troubling options for the White House and Congress that will result in a smaller U.S. global presence.

And .... we are now getting a taste of what a smaller U.S. global presence would mean. Arab revolution and unrest, tensions in every region in Asia, the disintegration of countries like Pakistan, a return to violence in Iraq, etc. The list is long and troubling .... but with a lesser U.S. role the end result is becoming clearer .... greater risks for war and confrontations between groups and countries who have a long history of wars and confrontations. Unfortunately, when that one major military confrontation does occur (i.e. China and India, Iran and one of its neighbors, Israel and everyone else) .... it is then that we will appreciate the positive role that the U.S. has played and continues to play in global affairs.