动脑而非动武.docVIP

动脑而非动武 　　ANOTHER debate to do with Iraq and Afghanistan is building in America, one that could have important consequences for the West. This debate is being conducted in the Pentagon―and it has to do with the future shape of America’s armed forces. With its far-flung（广泛的，分布广的）alliances and commitments, the superpower rightly wants a “full spectrum” of military capabilities to deal with everything from an all-out war to a small policing action. Butprecisely what the mix should be is increasingly contentious―and could prove expensive. 　　If the biggest threat comes from rising powers, such as a belligerent（好战的）Russia, America and its allies will need to invest in aircraft, ships and advanced weapons to cope. If the greatest challenge is the fight against militants and insurgents around the world―seen by some as a new and different “fourth generation” of warfare―then they will need more boots on the ground and, crucially, different sorts of soldiers wearing them. Sadly for taxpayers everywhere, the emerging answer from America is that a modern power needs to prepare for both challenges. But there has been a clear swing towards manpower from technology. 　　The change has been striking. The “transformation” advocated by Donald Rumsfeld, George Bush’s first defence secretary, envisaged(展望，想象) that the armed forces would be slimmed down and money invested in “smart” weapons, reconnaissance systems and data links. Speed, stealth, accuracy and networks would substitute for massed forces. The army’s idea of its “future warrior” was a kind of cyborg(电子人), helmet stuffed with electronic wizardry(魔力，绝技) and a computer display on his visor, all wirelessly linked to sensors, weapons and comrades. New clothing would have in-built heating and cooling. Information on the soldier’s physical condition would be beamed to medics, and an artificial “exoskeleton” (a sort of personal brace支柱，支架) would strengthen his limbs. 　　The initial success in toppling（翻倒，推翻）first the Taliban in Afgh