New US defence strategy

AndyPipkin said:

I think the main issue from a UK viewpoint is the almost complete lack of any discussion about NATO or other alliances in future US planning, they seem to be acknowledging they're on their own from now on. Whether the mnain drivers for this are technological or political, I'm not sure.
Quote from mentioned article

The military's experience so far in Iraq -- unlike during Operation Desert Storm in Kuwait -- has shown that the application of force alone cannot defeat even a far weaker and poorly armed enemy.
And what could we expect if the enemy would be better-armed and highly motivated?
Essentially we are looking at moving away from a two regional war strategy to a one regional war plus homeland security posture. This in itself isnt that big a deal for our allies. Second, our allies [NATO] have drawn down their militaries to the point where they can only be used as peacekeeping troops. Outside of Germany and the UK no other NATO country could field a division of troops for a 12 month rotation. So its not too far off the mark that the US has to be able to go it alone and if we get an ally or two then thats gravy.
The US are spot on with this and I don't blame them for viewing NATO nowadays with, at best, slight suspicion re. capability. And OTOH we make strategic decisions that take for granted that we will never act unilaterally's Labour making foreign policy by default by ensuring that the option isn't even available.

If we needed to put in an expeditionary force to, say, extract British nationals from a deteriorating Zim for example, who would actually help us? Our European "allies?" Please don't make me laugh.

The British army will be a compact, fully-integrated Corps of the US version in about twenty years if we're not careful. Oh well, at least you'll get better kit.