“Why?” A good question, which is partly what I was asking when I made the post. Who exactly is the US protecting Europe from? The Cold War is kinda over. Crazed hordes from Latvia? And what exactly are the threats to sea lanes that require billion dollar aircraft carriers and nuclear subs? The Black Pearl and it’s crew?

I've been asking this question for some time now. While I'm not certain of the current numbers, I do know that we have tens of thousands of military personnel stationed in Western Europe. Why? If there is a pressing military need, then why aren't the countries of Europe doing what is necessary to ensure their own protection? If there is no need, then why are we there?

After WWII, we kept large numbers of personnel in Europe to help stabilize things. When the Cold War became an issue, we stayed there to help prevent Western Europe from falling to the communists. Today, the situation is different. There is little chance of Fascism rising again in Western Europe. There isn't much chance of them falling to the communists. So, what is the real threat?

Week before last, there was a big NATO conference here in Colorado Springs. One of the headlines from that conference was that NATO needed more than a "paper army." Based on exercises, studies, and current experience, they found that even the deployment of some 40,000 NATO personnel (out of a combined force of well over a million) was already causing a lot of strain. That suggests that the NATO military forces are almost powerless in a real sense. Whose fault is that? A few years ago when terrible things were happening in the former Yugoslav republics, why were the NATO forces unable to handle a situation in their own backyard? Are they really that weak that they had to cry for American help to stop the killing? If so, then what good are they?

Terrible things happen in the world on an all to often basis. On any given day, dozens of small wars are being fought around the world, most often guerrila actions like the Shining Path in Peru and the Moslem terrorists in the Philippines. People are dying all too often, and wishful thinking or contemplating our navels won't change the harsh truth.

In the past several months, America has been criticized for taking action in Iraq and for not taking more action in Liberia. We're expected to do everything and nothing at the same time. In other words, we're supposed to be as useless as the UN (see how well the UN is doing in Bosnia and the Congo for recent examples of their ineptitude).

If America chooses to not be weak and helpless, that's our business. If other countries choose to spend their money on social programs instead of defense, that's their business. Only, don't always expect that Americans are going to be willing to spend our blood and treasure bailing out everyone only to be carped at by a bunch of ingrates. Sooner or later, America may start telling them that they're on their own.