Quote Originally Posted by Sawemoff View Post
I don't think he is at all talking about 'eliminating' all troops on the ground. He is saying that the large part of the defense budget will go to large air and sea forces/techological advancements, while the troops on the ground will still play a large role, but likely in much smaller force sizes with less heavy armor. I very well could be mistaken, but I feel that he is inferring that the gaps made by a smaller land army force are going to be filled in with naval and air force.

Don't criticize the interpretation, but thats just what I see his words meaning.

Note - on a side note, you cant forget that Gates was also the head of the CIA for quite some time, so his theory about roles for troops on the ground might be founded from a different perspective.
Could be that as well but it would only be effective in a conventional war. Meaning 2 countries fighting. The example of afghanistan would not apply to that type of scenario seeing as we aren't fighting an offical army. I do agree the phrasing leaves room for interpretation as to what he is talking about.