The truth behind the U.S. show of force in Asia

After 9/11, Bush started the growing reliance on Special Ops, then even more their light but deadly footprint appealed to Obama who greatly reduced troops abroad, and then Trump took that to another level by unshackling White House restrictions and deploying to even more areas.

However, there's now the danger that the US military's smallest group could be overused, taking on roles that regular military used to do:

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-special-operations-20170525-story.html

With special operations forces now posted in more than 80 countries, the ever-increasing set of missions and uptick in casualties give pause even to some military experts and veterans who support the expanding role.

“You talk about mission creep — this is strategic mission creep all over the world,” said retired Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, a 37-year Army veteran. “Special operations just isn’t sized to do that.”

“Rather than a mere ‘break-glass-in-case-of-war’ force, we are now proactively engaged across the battle space,” Thomas said.

“There’s been misuse and overuse of our special operation forces in recent years,” said Rep. Scott Taylor (R-Va.), a former Navy SEAL. “We need to be more discriminatory in how we use these forces because, in many ways, the future of the command depends on it.”

“We’ve mortgaged the future in order to facilitate current operations,” Theresa Whelan, acting assistant secretary of Defense for special operations, told the House Armed Services Committee in May.

The Trump administration, like the Obama administration, sees special operations as far easier to sustain than the vast U.S. military bases, housing tens of thousands of American troops and contractors, that once dotted Iraq and Afghanistan. Both the cost and the casualties have plummeted.

In most countries, special operations teams are chiefly assigned to train and coordinate with local government security forces, to fight their own wars instead of having to deploy large American forces to far-flung hot spots.

General Thomas warned that senior commanders feared that “more troops on the ground may mean you own the problem when you’re done with it.”

“U.S. policy is trying to shift the fighting burden to locals, which means we have to train pro-Western — or at least anti-jihadist — locals to do the fighting and dying,” said Christopher Harmer

That means relying on special forces who are “used to working in smaller numbers in austere conditions without a lot of friendly support in close proximity,” he added.

I wish for a world without the US military. That includes the reasons why they are positioned where they are, across the globe.

Unfortunately, many of the conflicts were aggravated and exacerbated by US involvement (under the radar ops included).

Unless all aggressors are reined in; the world faces and endless war, waged from continent to continent. Propelled by the self-justified righteous and fanatics.

It will not stop until mankind is depleted and the planet is ravaged.

Are all these show of force staged events really worth our mutual destruction?

Air Force is also short of Pilots. Wonder how much longer the US Military can spread itself across the Globe.

If I were an American I would fight for less participation globally.

If the US Military is over stretched, it is our own doing. We are training Afghan soldiers here in the US to fight in Afghanistan. We are taking orders to build armaments for other countries and not bothering to increase our own arsenal to the capacity. Stop crying and start building.