If this was accompanied by a commensurate reduction in world policing and starting land wars we don't intend to win and occupations we have no intention of actually finishing I would be for it.
With a reduction in force comes a greater reliance on military contractors. I do think that is the main purpose.
With a reduction in force comes a greater reliance on military contractors. I do think that is the main purpose.
So will the Pentagon staffing and the NSA also shrink to pre-WWII levels?I'm going with...no.
It's in keeping with that small, agile force BS. Hope they keep the equipment, we will get into another real war eventually, not just Team America stuff. Of course within the budget proposal is to keep the F-35 on track and scrap the A-10s since the former has proven its ground attack prowess and the latter is just an expensive boondoggle. Oh wait....
Don't they keep trying to scrap the A-10 and then keep bringing it back because they literally don't have anything else that fills the same role?
Seems kinda dumb to me.
Difference is, congresscritters dont have a financial interest in that airframe ;-)
Difference is, congresscritters dont have a financial interest in that airframe ;-)
It's a scary time to be in the military. They're cutting all the wrong things, IMO. Meanwhile, continued frustration is driving good junior officers and good NCOs from the service, leaving the turds to float to the top.
Ayep. DoD civilian employee budget is exploding, ditto contractors. They're compensating by stripping veteran benefits and cutting combat capacity.
Why they don't gut the paperpusher hierarchy with a chainsaw, I have no idea.
Look at the CIC, he hates the military, he hates that the US is the lone supper power, he hates our freedoms. No wonder he weakening out power and influence. Nature abhors a vacuum. Let's hope whatever fills it, is benevolent.
In the previous round of cut & reorg, the Army planned for something similar in the combat units, shucking off lots of HHC green-suiters. Preserved combat power and all systems at the pointy end. This round looks to gut quite a bit of capability. It is almost as if their civvie masters were pissed that some smart officers were able to meet the objectives without losing capability.
Heard a rumor that ALL the remaining ABCTs (equipped with Abrams, Bradley, & other mech warfare gear) were to be pushed into NG. Because the assumption is that we will not meet a heavy threat. Think on that. The only active duty heavies would be USMC Abrams. The only heavies ready for deployment RFN are the tank platoons in the MEUs. That is four Abrams. And not even our best Abrams (USMC fields M1A1).
Because the Paper pushers are the one's deciding who to cut. Such is the tale of armies throughout history. The [logistical] tail soon wags the dog.
In the previous round of cut & reorg, the Army planned for something similar in the combat units, shucking off lots of HHC green-suiters. Preserved combat power and all systems at the pointy end. This round looks to gut quite a bit of capability. It is almost as if their civvie masters were pissed that some smart officers were able to meet the objectives without losing capability.
Heard a rumor that ALL the remaining ABCTs (equipped with Abrams, Bradley, & other mech warfare gear) were to be pushed into NG. Because the assumption is that we will not meet a heavy threat. Think on that. The only active duty heavies would be USMC Abrams. The only heavies ready for deployment RFN are the tank platoons in the MEUs. That is four Abrams. And not even our best Abrams (USMC fields M1A1).
In the previous round of cut & reorg, the Army planned for something similar in the combat units, shucking off lots of HHC green-suiters. Preserved combat power and all systems at the pointy end. This round looks to gut quite a bit of capability. It is almost as if their civvie masters were pissed that some smart officers were able to meet the objectives without losing capability.
Heard a rumor that ALL the remaining ABCTs (equipped with Abrams, Bradley, & other mech warfare gear) were to be pushed into NG. Because the assumption is that we will not meet a heavy threat. Think on that. The only active duty heavies would be USMC Abrams. The only heavies ready for deployment RFN are the tank platoons in the MEUs. That is four Abrams. And not even our best Abrams (USMC fields M1A1).
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/24/us/politics/pentagon-plans-to-shrink-army-to-pre-world-war-ii-level.html?_r=1
The article really annoyed me as it makes this unstated assumption that if we spool down now we would not be able to ramp back up for a large war in the future. Demonstrably false.
If we get hit by a heavyweight actor, it is going to be over in days or weeks. They still know what war is.
It will be all in. They will blind us, cripple us and kill us. There will no no ramping up time at all.
If we get hit by a heavyweight actor, it is going to be over in days or weeks. They still know what war is.
It will be all in. They will blind us, cripple us and kill us. There will no no ramping up time at all.
How? If someone nuked us, we'd nuke them back. Other than that, no country has the capability to project force onto our mainland.
Not trying to be dismissive, just no idea how you see that happening.
Uhm, no. By "no", I mean absolutely no chance in hell. By "absolutely no chance in hell", I mean "Even if they really really tried and broke all of the rules... it still wouldn't happen". By "Even if they really really tried and broke all of the rules... it still wouldn't happen", I mean "Yea.... No."
;)
What heavyweight actor? You have EU, Russia and China. Brazil, NK and India wouldn't have a shot in hell even if they gave AK47's to every citizen and magically teleported them to the US. EU isn't going to invade. Russia doesn't have the economic resources, isn't stupid enough to want to do so and is aware that the SOLE military object we're more than ready to implement is a good Cold War inspired nuking. China is making money hand over fist from us. They might want to take Taiwan, but definitely not the US mainland. In any event, the EU, Russia and China would need a massive build up for even a limited war with the US.
There is only ONE heavyweight that would be capable of implementing what you say.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQeILlfdR-s
You're kidding.
I think you are underestimating what future developments will bring. I probably won't be around then but depending on how old you are now, you very well might.
Yeah, I don't think all the AD Armor/Mech is going away. They just shipped a battalions worth back to Europe after 2CR got their azzes handed to them in a recent NATO exercise. Seems that Strykers can't go toe-to-toe with heavy armor. Who knew? ;/ ;/ :facepalm: :facepalm:
If I'm understanding that correctly... That is insane, to put it mildly. ALL armor brigades going to the NG? I think a lot higher of the NG than a lot of folks, but having ZERO active duty armor brigades is nuts. You'd want some for Korea, at a minimum, and a couple more in case of a smaller power losing their marbles. Between this and the DoD betting damn near everything on the F-35, we're going to be in a very rough patch. The only plus side is the Navy is doing well, we have 10 active carriers and two in reserve.
We'll be in short straights with virtually no heavy armor and restricted fighter airframes across all of the services. Only plus side is that the US is unlikely to be invaded. Canada and Mexico don't exactly have a lot of offensive military capacity.
I think it is a bit funny that some people who complain about .gov spending money it doesn't have are now up in arms because it is cutting costs. I'll admit, there are many things I'd like to see cut long before taking a knife to the DOD budget, but having once worn a uniform, I know that there is a lot of fat in the DOD budget. That said, I think cutting the A-10 because it is a tank buster is just plain ignorant, because it overlooks the aircraft capability for close air support ops.
Honestly, I wonder how long it will be until someone has a serious thought about closing West Point, Annapolis, the Air Force Academy, and the Coast guard Academy, or in some way consolidating the programs...maybe move the Coasties in with the Squids, and put the Zoomies back with the Cadets.
I think it is a bit funny that some people who complain about .gov spending money it doesn't have are now up in arms because it is cutting costs. I'll admit, there are many things I'd like to see cut long before taking a knife to the DOD budget, but having once worn a uniform, I know that there is a lot of fat in the DOD budget. That said, I think cutting the A-10 because it is a tank buster is just plain ignorant, because it overlooks the aircraft capability for close air support ops.
Honestly, I wonder how long it will be until someone has a serious thought about closing West Point, Annapolis, the Air Force Academy, and the Coast guard Academy, or in some way consolidating the programs...maybe move the Coasties in with the Squids, and put the Zoomies back with the Cadets.
So why does He keep trying to start new wars every 15 minutes ???
If we get hit by a heavyweight actor, it is going to be over in days or weeks. They still know what war is.
It will be all in. They will blind us, cripple us and kill us. There will no no ramping up time at all.
LOL
Yeah, it will be funny as hell.
http://www.newenglishreview.org/Jerry_Gordon/Syria%27s_Bio-Warfare_Threat%3A_an_interview_with_Dr._Jill_Dekker/
Yeah, it will be funny as hell.
http://www.newenglishreview.org/Jerry_Gordon/Syria%27s_Bio-Warfare_Threat%3A_an_interview_with_Dr._Jill_Dekker/
Even with the cuts, we'll have the highest defense spending in the world by a fair margin.
What they're doing is not smart, they're cutting the wrong things.
But it's hardly going to lead to us getting ROFLstomped anytime soon
Stop with the fearmongering. It doesn't suit the denizens of this board
Posting in here because it's related. The TX national guard apparently has no use for an infantry E6 with combat time, drill sergeant badge, and outstanding NCOERs.
It looks like I may be leaving the guard.
Got your jump wings? They have an airborne unit.
Well, as long as we get the openly fruity and women into infantry units while reducing standards, it will be worth it. Because the .mil was originally created so that a slim minority of cultural marxists could bugger it silly while forcing it to salute the flag. Great for laughs all around.
Even with the cuts, we'll have the highest defense spending in the world by a fair margin.
What they're doing is not smart, they're cutting the wrong things.
But it's hardly going to lead to us getting ROFLstomped anytime soon
Stop with the fearmongering. It doesn't suit the denizens of this board
Yup. Damned near as funny as the misogynists we have here on APS. ;)
Use of a significant bio-weapon would decimate the entire world population, aside from areas so remote that they have means of projecting force beyond their borders. So, while it could conceivably bring on tikiwiki it wouldn't be an effective means of warfare. It's like a nuke that you where every one you drop on your enemy, you also drop one on yourself.
You say misogynist like its a bad thing
Joint service operations should continue, as started previously.
A lot of the former Air Force bases I haunted have become Joint Service Bases.
That's good. There's so much redundancy between services that offer no good purpose.
Hell, we have how many different versions of the Sikorsky helicopter?
UH-60 Black Hawk/HH-60 Pave Hawk/HH-60 Jay Hawk/SH-60 Sea Hawk - I know they're modded for each branch, but wow!
Air Force jets like the F-4, F-15, F-16, F-22 etc. have had tailhooks, and they will take a wire on the approach end during IFE landings.
They may or may not have the strengthened landing gear for carrier landings, but were it not for political infighting I could see a common fighter between USAF/USN/USMC.
The F-35 is common in name only. I don't know what the percentages are of parts commonality, but three separate variants for three different perceived missions means $$$.
When the EF-111 Raven was retired, they started doing Joint Service EA-6B Prowler sorties with mixed USAF/USN/USMC crews.
Look at our neighbors to the north - they took it to the extreme. Canada has no separate branches of service anymore, they're all just Canadian Forces.
I'm not saying we should go to that level of consolidation, but it should be studied and exploited.
And I still think an A-10 is a better tank-buster and close air support aircraft than any F-16/F-18/F-35.
Yup. Damned near as funny as the misogynists we have here on APS. ;)
Balog, you should search through Rooster's postings sometime.
You'll notice a not-so-subtle pattern.
I know we did.
Remind me to nominate you for the next admin slot.
Maybe the one I'll vacate...
Yeah, I'm totally expecting Syria to take a break from the massive civil war killing thousands on each side, and try to conjure up some delivery mechanism here. Knowing that if they do, they'll cease to exist.
Joint service operations should continue, as started previously.
A lot of the former Air Force bases I haunted have become Joint Service Bases.
That's good. There's so much redundancy between services that offer no good purpose.
Hell, we have how many different versions of the Sikorsky helicopter?
UH-60 Black Hawk/HH-60 Pave Hawk/HH-60 Jay Hawk/SH-60 Sea Hawk - I know they're modded for each branch, but wow!
Air Force jets like the F-4, F-15, F-16, F-22 etc. have had tailhooks, and they will take a wire on the approach end during IFE landings.
They may or may not have the strengthened landing gear for carrier landings, but were it not for political infighting I could see a common fighter between USAF/USN/USMC.
The F-35 is common in name only. I don't know what the percentages are of parts commonality, but three separate variants for three different perceived missions means $$$.
When the EF-111 Raven was retired, they started doing Joint Service EA-6B Prowler sorties with mixed USAF/USN/USMC crews.
Look at our neighbors to the north - they took it to the extreme. Canada has no separate branches of service anymore, they're all just Canadian Forces.
I'm not saying we should go to that level of consolidation, but it should be studied and exploited.
And I still think an A-10 is a better tank-buster and close air support aircraft than any F-16/F-18/F-35.
The chances of anyone building up anything resembling an invasion fleet would get noticed far enough ahead of time for us to build up our defenses
There's so much redundancy between services that offer no good purpose.
Not just equipment, but facilities and personnel as well. Why does each of the three branches need its own Medical Corps? Why does each have a separate and distinct JAG Corps and judicial system?
Then again, I find this to be true not just in the military, but throughout .gov. Why does every agency the uses initials have its own investigative unit, often complete with armed federal LEOs and (all too often) tactical teams. When I did an internship with the Justice Department 20 years ago, I was amazed by the sheer number of different "Criminal Investigation Divisions" belonging to the various agencies. I don't mean just things like DEA and BATF, I mean like Department of Education, Department of Agriculture, etc. Why not dump all of this into the FBI, and increase the number of Special Agents if the demand warrants?
Back to the OP, I've been reading that the push-back has begun in Congress. at first I figured it was the typical fight to keep the pork protected, for job security. but I read some of what we're saying, especially about the A-10. Why cut an aircraft at this point when its possible replacement has yet to prove itself, and the A-10 is a known quality asset for close air support, which is still in need until everyone comes home?
Again, I think that's something else we need to be very careful about, and I think the speculation could potentially heighten backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers. And what happened at Fort Hood was a tragedy, but I believe it would be an even greater tragedy if our diversity becomes a casualty here. And it's not just about Muslims. We have a very diverse army. We have a very diverse society.