I'd really like to see someone do a cost analysis comparing the current Cold War-leftover concept of "forward basing" with a scenario of mobilizing a number of "police actions" around the planet, all of which must start with all personnel and materiel in the States.

Would it really be less expensive?

Even in the present situation, gearing up for a major force expenditure in, say, Asia Minor, takes months and millions of dollars and is pretty easily detected. (Personal anecdote: I knew a couple of hours before CNN did that the balloon had gone up for Desert Storm; at the time, I lived beneath the flight paths in and out of Willow Grove NAS and McGuire AFB; the air traffic - type as well as number - was obvious). If we pull out of all of our foreign bases, how much longer might it take to get permission for a staging area the next time one's needed?

While we're at it, let's look at the US military in the realistic light of employment security as well as national security; that is, "It's not just an adventure - it's a job." Force reduction is a two-edged sword, to say the least. Either we muster out a large percentage of active units (remember what happened in the USSR when all the Afghan War vets came home?), or we have to give them something to do, and somewhere to live. From what I hear, housing conditions on Stateside bases wouldn't pass HEW minimum standards.

Pournelle usually thinks things through more thoroughly... and he's still best when teamed with Niven.