The Thin Green Line

When I was a kid it was a common thing to reflect on China marching on and dominating the world, by sheer mass of numbers.

It was a credible enough concept. The Chinese did not require sophisticated weapons; there was, supposedly, either a lack of concern for the individual or an individual fanaticism, depending on who was telling it; even sophisticated military nations would eventually be left helpless in the relentless wave of bodies surging forward.

Well things have changed, even in China. Little things like body bags and economic restraints have largely changed the dynamics of ‘military actions’ the modern alternative to war.

To some degrees, the still grossly inflated ‘defense’ budgets are focused more on high tech equipment than on personnel. But the dream of one sided wars, sans real people, never got of the pages of ‘Popular Science’ magazine.

The quick, sharp action, which would bring the enemy to its knees and ‘oppressed’ populations to their knees in thanks is more a Madison Avenue concept than a reality.

The current major engagements, Iraq and Afghanistan, those brutal, intangible ‘non-war’ missions are showing up the unrealistic and erroneously based strategies of our world’s policemen, the US led ‘coalition of the willing’.

The stress on deployment recourses is becoming increasingly evident as these clean, sharp actions drag on indefinitely.

All the coalition partners, increasingly, have personnel in the field who simply should not be there. There are soldiers who lack proper training, who are mentally and emotionally unsuited to a modern war, where sheer brutality is judged unacceptable.

Basic equipment issue is now being revealed as sub-standard, leaving soldiers vulnerable in many ways.

The US are bolstering their deployment from sources which are simply not trained or intended for military use. These include the National Guard and various contractors. In fact if it were not for the likes of Halliburton subsidiary, Kellogg Brown and Root, the US would be straining to provide a military presence; a fact that suggests an increasingly mercenary war.

Britain’s government, under pressure at home, is promising an open purse to bring equipment and supplies up to standard for their deployments.

Even if Blair’s regime finally does turn words into action, they still have a serious problem with personnel levels.

Among their properly trained troops there are too many who have simply been in the field too long, jumping from one theatre to the next on the basis that a change is as good as a holiday.

British troops are currently suffering close to a 10 attrition rate, with psychological and stress related issues dropping them faster than the poppy growing Taliban can.

Australia sent the best and finest in the first and second wave deployments. That so few Australian casualties have been reported is a testament to the well trained core of their military.

Now, as those two major engagements continue, and minor issues like East Timor and Solomon Islands drain resources, the quality and training has diminished greatly.

Not just with the troops either. Simple supplies like boots and clothing are being described as shoddy and unfit for service. While Australia budgets billions to pay for new fighter planes, helicopters and ships, the Aussie digger can’t get a decent pair of boots.

The arrogant bastards who are the leaders of the ‘coalition’ have become victims of time and their own foolish exploits.

These were never going to be fast clean campaigns, and those countries never had the resources for indefinite deployments.

The Iraqi ‘insurgents’ and the Afghani poppy growers have nothing to lose by prolonging these conflicts, and everything to gain.

They can put their limited resources directly and relevantly to work at a moments notice. They are cheap to operate, usually in the right place and despite their casualty rate, brutally effective.

Time is on their side.