Building from our previous, now closed, conversation about reducing the scale of the military, I had been asked a very good question from JonC and here's my reply: Because our technology out ranks all the other countries. As one of my friends, who is a retired colonel pointed out to me, its like they're fighting with repeater rifles and we've got Gatling guns. Its not close. If we look closer at the cuts being considered we see that there are also expansions in place. For instance, drone technology is expanding. That in and of itself allows for multiple units being controlled by a theater control device to stage out engagement so that one airman can control multiple units over the course of several sorties. Also, go count up how many aircraft carriers the Chinese have vs the US. Then look at the nature and age of their sub fleet vs our subs. When your closest opponent is fighting with swords and you've got a gun, even if there is more of them, you still win. For anyone to say North Korea is a threat to anyone other than South Korea is a statement of ignorance. They can't even get a nuke to fly upwards on a consistent basis and rhetoric doesn't power their rockets. Russia isn't aggressively working on their military for an international conflict because they've got economic issues and terrorism to deal with. So who's left? The reality is that a reduced force is a wise management of our budget dollars in light of crushing domestic issues that should have been handled years ago. There is zero reason to field such a force this size right now. BTW, I am all for instituting a mandatory 2 year draft for all graduating high schoolers. It'll help on a lot of levels and be cheaper than fielding all these existing units in perpetuity. Perhaps this can be a starting point, please remember friends, we're not talking about Israel.