Former Iraq administrator sees decades-long U.S. military presence

With all the hubbub about gay marriage, Nipplegate, and Sex and the City, this article somehow managed to slip beneath the radar:

Retired Army Lt. Gen. Jay Garner, the former interim
administrator of post-conflict reconstruction efforts in Iraq, said
Thursday that a U.S. military presence in Iraq should last "the next
few decades," but questioned the mix of forces already there and
current plans to reconfigure the armed forces as a whole.
Echoing concerns raised by lawmakers at this week's defense budget
hearings, Garner said in an interview with National Journal Group
reporters and editors that the size of the Army and Marine Corps should
be increased by enlarging the infantry or ground forces. And he warned
that the current strain on National Guard and Reserve forces deployed
to Iraq and Afghanistan could cripple efforts to retain experienced
soldiers.
[...]
"Certainly the high-tech war is faster, it's neater and it works pretty
good, but not in all scenarios," he said. "The problem with the Army is
they just don't have enough infantry."

Up until recently, this man was the Grand Poobah of Iraq. He still has
massive pull and remains very much in the loop. Couple his assertions
of "not enough infantry", a decades-long occupation, and recent news
reports of imminent retirements from the armed forces and what do you
have? The perfect recipe for a draft.
I predict that if Bush wins the election, there will be serious talk of
a national draft starting in December. I know it sounds far-fetched,
but remember what you're dealing with here. Nothing is outside the
bounds of possibility with this administration.

Posted by flow Frazao on February 25, 2004 at 10:00 AM | Permalink