There are not many countries which have the resources (money/manpower/material) to stage a long-range deployment in anything like significant numbers, let alone significant time frames. They won't be paying for it. We Americans will be told to foot the bill, for our safety, you know.
....and the fact that an event that would trigger such a deployment would also demonstrate fairly conclusively that such a deployment would be ineffectual
So the government would admit that the solution to a problem is not more government? You have to be kidding.
Unless you envision the US taking over the hypothetical foreign governments, then I'm not sure how you propose to have the US pay for this. Presumably, the way it would work would be to transfer the money to the foriegn government, who would then pay their soldiers, buy equipment, etc. Not terribly practical - international exchange rates, corruption among officials (who could imagine that), and the fact that money (particularly in the form of taxes) is not inexhaustable conspire against this idea. Plus, no matter how much you want to pay for something, if it doesn't exist (or isn't for sale), you can't get it.
And, no, I'm not expecting the 'government' to admit anything. I'm suggesting that foreign troops would not be an option, politically.
-SV