Early this month, US Defence secretary Robert Gates put an end to this debate. Gate’s newly announced defence budget makes clear that America’s military future lies in what the Pentagon calls, "expeditionary warfare" or "counter-insurgency operations". The British, less given to euphemisms than Americans, used to call their distant operations against unruly natives, "colonial warfare" or "little wars". But in 1914, the British Empire’s army, trained to fight colonial wars against Zulu, Dervishes and Afghans, met the modern Imperial German Army and suffered a bloodbath.

While Gates waved his big stick and warned all misbehaving Muslims, President Barack Obama was playing good cop on his visit to Turkey, offering the "hand of friendship" to the very same Muslim world to which Gates was planning to dispatch more US troops and killer drones.

Though the US deficit just reached a staggering US$1 trillion (RM3.59 trillion) for the first half of 2008, military spending will still rise 4%. The Afghan and Iraq wars are costing US$200 billion (RM718.6 billion) alone this year.

So much for Obama’s promised government austerity. No wonder many defence stocks rose on news of the Pentagon’s new budget. Congressmen and lobbyists will scream to high heaven when some major weapons programmes are terminated, but overall, the US military industrial complex is hardly suffering. Supporting the Afghan and Iraq wars is now the Pentagon’s priority. Fifty more deadly Predator and Reaper drones will be acquired. They are the Pentagon’s favourite tool for "taking out" foes in Pakistan and Afghanistan. The British writer George Orwell called using such euphemisms, "making murder respectable".

More special forces and advanced ground and air sensors to target "terrorists" and "insurgents" (ie those resisting the American Raj) will be deployed. Over 500 more versatile F-35 strike aircraft will be bought. Production of the magnificent stealth F-22’s, costing US$140 million (RM503 million) a piece, will shortly end. The army loses heavy combat vehicles and artillery systems. The US Navy loses one of its eleven carriers and some planned high-tech destroyers. Coastal combat vessels for shallow water Gulf and Third World operations will be added.

These realignments of defence spending clearly show the Obama administration intends to pursue a long-war strategy in Afghanistan, Iraq, perhaps Somalia, and in other future Third World hot spots located near major oil deposits. Bush’s so-called "war on terror" cost taxpayers US$808 billion (RM2.9 trillion). Obama has renamed it "overseas contingency operations", but otherwise he seems to be following Bush’s lead.

What caused so much heated debate in the Pentagon – and the heads of some senior generals – is the concern that reconfiguring the US military to fight "counter-insurgency" wars in the Muslim world will undermine national defence and America’s ability to wage future wars against other great powers like China, Russia or even India and Europe.

The US Navy’s carriers, America’s key to strategic power projection, are now seriously threatened by three new weapons. China’s improved, 2,000km range DF-21 missile that can be guided onto carriers by radar, satellite and drones; Russia’s 300kph "Shkvall" torpedo; and the Russo-Indians supersonic BrahMos 300km range anti-ship missile. They may make US carriers sitting ducks.

It takes decades to order and deploy new weapons systems. The Obama administration has now locked the US military on a course that cannot be quickly changed if new strategic threats emerge.