Rides...: “More like hot spots and an ability to react with great speed to such threats.”
That’s why the nation needs overseas bases so that we can preposition assets and quickly react to threats. Those forward bases give our leaders options. The problem isn’t the bases. It’s that our leaders keep using the “engage” option. They should be using the “deterrent” option. The only legitimate use of US military forces is to protect the nation from imminent threats to the nation and its citizens. Rescue missions to extract US citizens or protect them from pirates? Yes. Preemptive attacks to destroy threats when intelligence shows they represent an imminent threat, for example being prepped for launch? OK. Bombing Libya and killing Libyan civilians in order to save civilians? Eh, not so much.
I may be stating the obvious, but warfare is constantly changing and evolving; those that do not adapt lose the race. History is replete with examples of generals using a particular style of outdated tactics and paying the price.
We'll be looking at more unmanned weaponry, greater stand off power, and using the wealth of information to adapt tactics on a minute to minute basis.
The idea of using 'robots' has been around for decades, but not in the same context as machines coupled with extreme computing speeds and 'intelligence'. We have already put some of this in the field. It's here and now.