Marines short 6 Infantry Battalions and the Navy short 100 ships.

U.S. carrier battle groups are not intended to fight carriers from other countries.

 

Out of curiosity what does the TOE for an infantry battalion look like today? I know Marines are different than the army especially mech inf. But beyond that sad to say my mist recent info goes back to the eighties and they were still trying to right size an air cav unit.

They did not know that while it was being built. Note current US destroyers are as large or larger than a WWII heavy cruiser.

 

Right - and what was the point of bringing up this information.

 

It happens all the time with the military. They buy dreams and pay their people s%^t.
Hence why cutting the budget is a good thing.

"
5. Missile Defense Systems


In the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan proposed his controversial “Star Wars” missile defense system, a futuristic program that would shoot down Soviet ICBMs headed toward the U.S. before the nukes could destroy their targets. Never mind that the technology wasn’t there, the Missile Defense Agency was born, charged with developing a workable system, and continues to this day. So far the agency has spent over $10 billion and counting unsuccessfully developing missile defense systems. There were the lasers built into 747s that were going to shoot down missiles but would have to fly so close to enemy borders that they were sitting ducks for opponent anti-aircraft fire. Cost: over $5 billion. There were the $1.7 billion rocket interceptors that were to be fired from naval ships, except that they were too long and would have necessitated retrofitting the ships at a cost of multiple billions of dollars. There was the Multiple Kill Vehicle, a sort of Gatling gun that would fire small interceptors to destroy ICBMs. Cost: $700 million, and it never even got to the test stage. There was Sea-Based X-Band Radar (SBX), which was going to detect any incoming missiles and not be faked out by decoy missiles, except that it was prone to corrosion at sea, cost millions of dollars to fuel for short periods of times, and, oh yeah, it was faked out by decoy missiles. Cost: $2.2 billion.


Missile Defense Agency director Vice Admiral James D. Syring told the Los Angeles Times in a written statement, “We are very confident of our ability… and we will continue to conduct extensive research, development and testing of new technologies to ensure we keep pace with the threat.” Be afraid. The zombies live."

https://www.salon.com/2015/12/10/5_...cts_your_tax_dollars_are_subsidizing_partner/

 

To point out that comparing U.S. carrier forces to those of other nations is meaningless.

 

I have to ask why was there a need to rebuild the military in the first place? Let's look at that.

Obama budget's military cuts could be rude awakening for veterans

"PINEHURST, N.C. -- President Barack Obama sent Congress a $3.9 trillion budget for next year. It includes tax increases on the wealthy and spending on things like roads and job training. Little of it will pass the Republican House.
The budget would also shrink the armed forces. This could mean tens of thousands of service members will join the civilian workforce."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-budgets-military-cuts-could-be-rude-awakening-for-veterans/


The Obama era is over. Here's how the military rates his legacy
"His moves to slim down the armed forces, move away from traditional military might and overhaul social policies prohibiting the service of minority groups have proven divisive in the ranks. His critics have accused him of trading a strong security posture for political points, and for allowing the rise of terrorists like the Islamic State group whom the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were supposed to silence."

"More than half of troops surveyed in the latest Military Times/Institute for Veterans and Military Families poll said they have an unfavorable opinion of Obama and his two-terms leading the military. About 36 percent said they approve of his job as commander in chief.

Their complaints include the president’s decision to decrease military personnel (71 percent think it should be higher), his moves to withdraw combat troops from Iraq (59 percent say it made America less safe) and his lack of focus on the biggest dangers facing America (64 percent say China represents a significant threat to the U.S.)"
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/...ver-here-s-how-the-military-rates-his-legacy/

 

Why people doubt the military utility of what are essentially large mobile airfields is beyond me.

 

Not meaningless at all - as the comparison had nothing to do with carrier battle groups fighting each other.

You must have gotten confused somewhere along the way.

 

Oh, we spend too much, in my view, anyway, probably on a lot of wrong things, so military budget reform, priorities, alignment, etc., is needed.

Given...

 

It the US bought Chinee equipment and paid our people the same as they pay the Chinese, we would have a smaller defense budget than the Chinese.

As it is, both China and Russia are on a par with us when you compare capabilities. We are better in some ways and they are better in others

 

Could it be that Dirty Donald and the retired Colonel he has appointed Douglas McGregor to the Pentagon is intent on eliminating the Marine Corps likening it to the long departed Army cavalry ????

 

I don't know, I'll have to see some evidence. If you have it, I'd like to see it.

 

Military Strength Comparisons (2020) (globalfirepower.com)

 

Certainly some money went to the wall from the DOD ( like $3.8 Billion).

https://www.npr.org/2020/02/13/8057...-8-billion-in-pentagon-funding-to-border-wall

Of course, that won't FINISH the project. Maybe Steve Bannon can kick in the rest from his fundraising activities.................... oh wait ............

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/20/politics/bannon-build-the-wall-indictment/index.html

Well, then maybe Dirty Donnie the Superspreader Swamp Think can get the money from Mexico...................oh wait................

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/14/politics/fact-check-trump-mexico-paying-for-the-wall/index.html

 

Trump has made extensive changes at the Pentagon over the past few weeks all of them in the executive area of Pentagon management. He has basically cleaned house apparently with the objective of putting his own flunky followers in charge of our nations military and their equipment. Putin and Russia are probably ecstatic.

 

Who cares what the troops think - they are the last folks one should consult on the issue - conflict of interest central - on the question at hand. Its like asking a Police Chief if he thinks legalizing pot is a good idea - such would be an equally silly thing to do for an objective opinion.

On the question of whether or not to increase or reduce Total Military Spending - while reducing personnel is one way to cut costs.. it is not the only way to cut costs - and costs could be cut without reducing personnel - so this point -is not necessarily even relevant to the question .. although related.

No clue what is being referred to by "Security Posture" but smells like BS - Obama was very pro Pentagon - and the Military Industrial Complex - increasing police powers and so on . a complete 180 degree flip flop in many respects.

"Allowing the Rise of Terrorist groups" - this is a humorous one - albeit completely correct. Obama led a large coalition of nations in a massive effort to support, supply and arm - Al Qaeda - with tens of thousands of tons of sophisticated military technology - over many years - in the war in Syria.

This is not "speculation" - this is well established historical fact - actions which led to the "Stop Arming Terrorist Act" - being introduced to Congress in 2017. -

Rand Paul on CNN's Sunday Morning show "State of the Union" -

http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2...-my-son-into-that-mess-on-the-crisis-in-iraq/

We were allied with Al Qaeda in two wars for most of the last decade .. Syria and Yemen. For Yemen we are being investigated for complicity in crimes against humanity / war crimes. Just wait till they get to Syria.

Dirty deeds - Done Dirt Cheap

 

False statistic from a biased source.

 

We can afford it.

 

Obama's military budgets were al constrained by the Budget Control Act and Sequestration both of which were enacted by both parties. There was a conscious effort to downsize and modernize all branches of the military, which now evidently Trump may be accelerating by eliminating the Marine Corps.

 

The Budget Control Act and Sequestration was the only way a budget could be agreed upon. . It was a compromise the republicans did not like.

Trump is not the one studying whether to eliminate the Marine Corps. It is being studied by DOD. The marines duplicate functions of the Army, Navy and Air Force. I would hate to see them go. They are an elite force which could never be replaced by the Army, Navy and Air Force.

 

By the people TRUMP put in charge of the Defense Department just recently, after removing the command that had been there for years.

 

It is a study. Not likely to happen.

 

If you say so - it must be true.

 

Presidents cannot eliminate the Marine Corps. Its existence and even its minimal size is protected by laws passed by Congress. They were passed because President Truman was seen as hostile to the Marine Corps so Congress acted to protect it.

 

Biden wisely wants to re-establish diplomacy as a key element in our foreign policy approach.