Our current military readiness

The U.S. military today don't like using the term "hollow force" that was used during the late 1970's decsribing the poor shape our military was in.

Today our military is in worse shape than it was back in 1978.

I haven't been participating on this thread because the numbers I have on combat reediness of our military are almost a year old. Usually the combat readiness of any military unit is classified and kept classified for two years. Every month every division, brigade, regiment and company or squadron is rated in combat readiness. C-1 to C-5.

What is not classified...
1/2 of the Navy's FA-18's cant fly.
1/2 of the Navy's ships can't achieve a C-1 combat readiness and can't put to sea and fight.
3/4 of all U.S. Marines FA-18's and CH-53 Super Stallions can't fly.
The U.S. Air Force is almost in the same poor shape as the Navy.
1/2 of the FMF has less than a C-2 combat readiness and can't be deployed.
Of the U.S. Army's 33 Combat Brigades only five have reached a combat readiness of C-2 and can be deployed into combat.
(Big improvement than during the Obama administration when only three brigades were combat deployable)

Why does America spend so much freaking money on the military ?

We are no longer the nation of citizens soldier but have an all volunteer military and todays military is a married military and that gets to be really expensive consuming almost 1/3 of the military budget.

Unlike other countries in the world, we spend billions on R&D while other militaries don't have to because they steal of copy our technology.

Unlike Russia and China, Americans working in our defense plants are well paid, most are high paying union jobs while their counterparts in other countries aren't paid much.

 

If you want to believe that myth and waste another trillion dollars in corporate welfare, fine. But there isn't a word of truth in it and you know it.

 

.

 

U.S. MILITARY POWER






http://index.heritage.org/military/2017/assessments/

 

I have pretty much completely tuned it out myself.

It is pure coprolite, where people scream back and forth the usual Liptard-Loosertarian coprolite about MIC on one side and Marxist crap on the other. Then point to amount of money spent by a nation that is smaller than Wyoming, and say it proves their point.

Absolutely nothing to bother with. Just a bunch of fishwives screeching back and forth, and rather dull to be honest.

 

I fully accept your graph.

And I also accept the fact that it is entirely irrelevant.

Evidently, we are spending it in all the wrong places.

Please refer again to the OP...

 

weak & marginal ~ ridiculous


has someone from the military complex paid you to post such nonsense?

 

Politically correct gender friendly commodes on warships aren't cheap.

How not to build warships

The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) better known as the Little Crappy Ship that needs a tug boat escort because they keep breaking down and can't survive in combat.

The Zumwalt class destroyer that has two 155 mm pop guns but each round cost $800,000 to pop the gun.

New Warship’s Big Guns Have No Bullets
Barely two weeks after the US Navy commissioned its newest and most futuristic warship, armed with two huge guns that can hit targets 80 miles away, the service is moving to cancel the projectiles for the guns, citing excessive costs that run up to $800,000 per round or more...
https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-news/2016/11/07/new-warships-big-guns-have-no-bullets/

https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/that-s-got-to-be-nice-for-repositioning-1788804387
Originally, there were 28 Zumwalt-class destroyers planned. That number dropped to seven and finally came to rest at three. And while the number of ships has dropped, the costs have not: the LRLAP’s unit price has increased steadily.

 

Scrap the whole lot

 

Just Marines, sailors and a few soldiers and airmen.

If you aren't busy on Wednesday...watch.
Current Readiness of U.S. Forces
Subcommittee: SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS AND MANAGEMENT SUPPORTDate: Wednesday, February 8, 2017Time: 02:30 PMLocation: Room SR-232A, Russell Senate Office Building...-> https://www.armed-services.senate.gov/hearings/17-02-08-current-readiness-of-us-forces

This was the hearing from last Feb 8th, 2017...-> https://www.c-span.org/video/?423446-1/military-officials-testify-us-armed-services-readiness

Pay close attention that most of the Democrat Senators ask questions about social engineering of the military while Republican Senators are more concerned if the military can actually fight and win battles.

 

What would you suggest the U.S. defend its shores (something you seem obsessed with) with?

 

Yes call me obsessed with protecting the AMERICAN people

 

The United States is not defendable at its literal borders. Just as you can't give an extremely week football team the ball on your one yard line and expect to prevent them from scoring eventually.

Now I would wager you're going to claim that "other nations manage to do that". Actually almost no other nation practices "defense at the borders". The British, French, Russians, Israel, and Chinese are all highly active in some capacity at great distances from their borders. Most other nations simply lack the economic strength to do so.

The South Koreans have lost hundreds at least possibly thousands to attacks by the North Koreans since the cease fire was signed.

 

You are making my case. Lets do what the british, French, Russians, Israel and chineses do. Do they have a hunded bases all over the world? Do they have ten CBG's? They don't have that IF YOU COMBINED ALL THEIR MILITARIES. We have all that. Time to cut it in half

 

And who keeps the sea lanes open that the U.S. depends on. And why do you think China is building carriers as fast as they can if they don't see the value in them?

And the Russians and Israelis spend more of their GDP on their military than the U.S. does so I'm not certain of your reasoning.

 

China will not catch up to us in 50 years. Why is it OUR job to keep the sea lanes open FOR THE ENTIRE PLANET. You have just bought into the hype.

 

If we don't who will? The British and French (and no other European nation) is economically strong enough to maintain a blue water navy. I don't trust Russian and China to act in our interests.

You are not being reasonable.

 

YOU are not being reasonable. If the sea lanes need protecting for the WORLD then everyone needs to step up and protect them.

 

And if they won't? The U.S. still needs secure sea lanes even if no other nation assists in keeping them open.

 

Why do we need them more than anyone else on the planet? They don't need them too?

 

By the way....who is going to be attacking these sea lanes? Somali pirates? LOL

 

For starters the U.S. is far and away the largest economy the world heavily import an export driven.

 

Everyone needs to do their part. And they do not have to now because we do it all

 

Criminals generally don't strike when there are cops nearby.

It's called deterrence. And though you sneer and dismiss it, piracy is a huge problem on the worlds oceans. And would no doubt be even worse if not for the U.S. Navy.

 

A multi national force could do a BETTER job