User Tag List

Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: US Army 2008 Modernization Strategy: 30 or 40 Yrs of War

  1. #1
    heart on fire Array
    Join Date
    May 2007

    Default US Army 2008 Modernization Strategy: 30 or 40 Yrs of War

    US Army Releases 2008 Modernization Strategy
    09-Sep-2008 20:44 EDT

    US generals planning for resource wars

    ANALYSIS: The US military sees the next 30 to 40 years as involving a state of continuous war against ideologically-motivated terrorists and competing with Russia and China for natural resources and markets, writes Tom Clonan

    "...The 2008 modernisation strategy, written by Lieut Gen Stephen Speakes, deputy chief of staff of the US army, contains the first explicit and official acknowledgement that the US military is dangerously overstretched internationally. It states simply: "The army is engaged in the third-longest war in our nation's history and . . . the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) has caused the army to become out of balance with the demand for forces exceeding the sustainable supply."

    Against this backdrop, the 90 page document sets out the future of international conflict for the next 30 to 40 years - as the US military sees it - and outlines the manner in which the military will sustain its current operations and prepare and "transform" itself for future "persistent" warfare.

    The document reveals a number of profoundly significant - and worrying - strategic positions that have been adopted as official doctrine by the US military. In its preamble, it predicts a post cold war future of "perpetual warfare".

    According to its authors: "We have entered an era of persistent conflict . . . a security environment much more ambiguous and unpredictable than that faced during the cold war."

    It then goes on to describe the key features of this dawning era of continuous warfare. Some of the characteristics are familiar enough to a world audience accustomed to the rhetoric of the global war on terror.

    "A key current threat is a radical, ideology-based, long-term terrorist threat bent on using any means available - to include weapons of mass destruction - to achieve its political and ideological ends."

    Relatively new, "emerging" features are also included in the document's rationale for future threats.

    "We face a potential return to traditional security threats posed by emerging near-peers as we compete globally for depleting natural resources and overseas markets."

  2. #2
    Per Ardua Array Metamorphosis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007


    It's the nature of being the hegemon that you are in a state of "persistent conflict."

    I'm not saying its a good thing, though.
    "You will always be fond of me. I represent to you all the sins you never had the courage to commit."

    Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office
    than to serve and obey them. - David Hume

  3. #3
    Senior Membrane Array spirilis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    9w1 sp
    INTj Ni


    Uhh. 1984 anyone?

    intp | type 9w1 sp/sx/so

  4. #4
    Senior Member Array Lucifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008


    It is about power, or lack thereof. A global strategic plan consisting of the M.A.D. principle has secured the word in the past because of the rationing of power.
    With the American army stretching itself so hard, and drawing from their nations economy other powers, such as terrorists, can now step into the gap. The former mentioned principle has no purpose for a radical terrorists, andthus removes what security was in the world. When considering such statements as "persistent warfare" it is highly unlikely in this post-cold war era, because any serious open conflict would quickly escalate to obvious ends. There would be more of a hunting principle that would be persistent but would hardly be warfare. The GWOT would become less complicated though then in this time, since western powers would eventually be pressured by the people to go after the base of terrorists power.
    This could be certain middle-eastern countries or even western countries that supply terrorists with training or weapon. conomic warfare has been here since the drastic imperialization of the world near the turn of the 20th century. When countries started to realize how small the world really is to their growing population and economies. The world wars were based off defending their empires because of economic tensions. And more recently China has been buying out the United States's economy to the point where they own an uncomfortable amount of their debt. The point is that with the only superpower left is weening and there will be a transition period.
    This world is mine - in time.

  5. #5
    heart on fire Array
    Join Date
    May 2007


    Interesting article:

    Constant Conflict


    From Parameters, Summer 1997, pp. 4-14.

Similar Threads

  1. New US Security Strategy
    By Take Five in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-28-2010, 08:37 AM
  2. know any good rpg/open ended/strategy games for ps1 or 2?
    By Ulaes in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 06-20-2009, 01:05 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts