| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Land of the Free |
| Getting Out of Forever Wars |
| 2025-03-24 |
| [Tennessee Star] Since the 9/11 attacks, the United States has been mired in "forever wars"—prolonged conflicts with no clear victory, draining trillions of dollars, thousands of lives, and economic vitality. A 2023 Pew poll shows 54% of Americans favor reducing overseas military commitments, with 83% prioritizing domestic needs—a clear call for change. The U.S. can no longer afford years of military overreach. A pragmatic strategy emphasizing diplomacy, allied burden-sharing, and strategic restraint is essential to protect national interests without exhausting finite resources. THE OVERWHELMING COST OF WAR The post-9/11 wars have exacted a staggering toll. Brown University’s Costs of War Project estimates the U.S. has spent $8 trillion—38% of 2020’s GDP—on conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Syria, equating to $24,000 per citizen. Future interest on this debt could add $2.2 trillion to the national debt by 2050, burdening future generations. Human losses are equally dire: 7,000 service members and 8,000 contractors killed, 55,000 injured, and 940,000 total deaths from direct violence, with 3.6 million more dying indirectly in war zones. Beyond numbers, the mental health crisis is profound. Veterans and active-duty personnel from these conflicts have died by suicide at four times the rate of combat losses—over 28,000 since 2001, according to 2022 VA data — mainly driven by post-traumatic stress disorder and repeated deployments. Adding to the exhausting cost of conflict, caring for these veterans will cost $2.2-$2.5 trillion by 2050. These financial and human costs prove the wars’ unsustainability; constrained resources and public concerns require the U.S. to reassess its global security approach. RETHINKING OVERSEAS COMMITMENTS The U.S. maintains 750 military facilities across 80 countries, per a 2021 International Institute of Strategic Studies, at an annual cost of $80 billion—$55 billion for bases alone. The Quincy Institute reports that 91% of post-9/11 operations relied on these bases. Yet, they’ve often fueled instability—think of the disorder stemming from Iraq’s insurgency or Afghanistan’s collapse—rather than the security they were supposed to provide. This sprawling footprint, born of Cold War logic, no longer aligns with today’s fiscal environment, demanding a leaner, more practical approach. A PRAGMATIC PATH FORWARD Some argue that overseas military bases help deter terrorism, but the evidence suggests otherwise. According to the Cato Institute (2023), the probability of dying in a U.S. terrorist attack is just 1 in 150 million. Since 9/11, America has experienced nine terrorist attacks, resulting in a total of 44 deaths. In contrast, during the same period, the U.S. military suffered over 7,000 fatalities and 55,000 injuries in Iraq and Afghanistan, raising questions about the purpose of military operations overseas. The cost alone is staggering. According to a Cato Institute report, a conservative baseline for total overseas basing costs is $80 billion annually, with some estimates reaching $100-$150 billion. This reflects differing indirect expenses, like troop support, highlighting the obscurity of overseas spending. A 2023 RAND study also found that 30% of bases lack strategic purpose. A 25% reduction, focusing on outdated Cold War sites and unproductive Middle East efforts, would save $15 billion annually. However, completely withdrawing is unwise; bases in Japan and Germany still deter Russia and China and allow forces to posture when needed. Closing outdated posts in stable regions—like parts of Europe or Asia—frees billions for pressing domestic defense needs. The use of hard power has become overextended, yielding little success and eventually weighing heavily on the American public. A more effective strategy entails carefully reducing America’s overseas presence, reallocating resources, and reprioritizing homeland defense. |
| Posted by:Besoeker |
| #4 True strength lies in the ability to protect all that is important. - mossomo Our wars have largely been successful until the State Department gets involved. |
| Posted by: mossomo 2025-03-24 12:56 |
| #3 Sadly, it's a world condition: In Deepest Everything |
| Posted by: Skidmark 2025-03-24 11:24 |
| #2 Sadly, the US isn't defending "everything". Let's start with the USA-MEX border.... |
| Posted by: DooDahMan 2025-03-24 09:12 |
| #1 Frederick the Great, "He who defends everything defends nothing," |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2025-03-24 08:08 |