The fact that putting more troops in country means they look like a domineering force versus part of a team to rebuild. Evidently, this issue was of far greater concern in the Middle East unlike postwar Germany and Japan. Well, we had no troops in Japan proper until after the surrendered, so any troops at all was an increase. In Germany we were sending folks home ASAP, leaving those with "not enough points" to form the occupation forces. My father was one of those. Other than confiscating a few caches of small arms, including knives, hunting with their Garands, and fishing with hand grenades, he never talks about any combat operations after the surrender. There were some, but not many, and were virtually none in Japan. When their God-Emperor said "surrender", they surrendered.
The Iraqi situation, starting with "foreign fighters" has been totally different.
So he was one of the U.S. Constabulary forces back then?
That must have been an interesting job.
My dad was an editor of Stars & Stripes in Honolulu. The point system problem, as in don't mention any increases to same in order to prevent more soldiers from going home, was driven home by none other than a most displeased Fleet Admiral Nimitz himself. He brought the entire S&S editorial board in and chewed them out for printing a rumor.
That is one meeting he never forgot being a sgt. in the army and talking to a living god :-)