U.S. Military Can't Even Fight One War Today

LOL!!

OK...exactly what scenario do you see that would possibly be an issue for us and make sure it is a POSSIBLE and VIABLE scenario not something with very little chance of happening.

AA

 

When Americans say I have had enough and want America to become great again. (*)(*)(*)(*) Walmart and the "Walmart Factor."

 

Well in reality the Chinese Exports which total close to 1/2 Trillion Dollars a year that we purchase from China effectively leave China at our mercy.

Nothing we get from China has any real or dire Strategic value and we could easily make it ourselves or have other nations make it.

If China was to do something we did not want them to do we could simply stop allowing any and all Chinese Ships into port in the U.S. thus stopping all purchases of Chinese Exports.

This would effectively collapse the Chinese Economy in a week.

AA

 

We use to make those stuff, but America was sold out by the multi nationally owned corporations that once use to be entirely American owned corporations.

The chi-coms have the same agenda that Imperial Japan had.

Right now the Chinese are where Imperial Japan was in the late 1920's or early 1930's.

 

The Chinese are changing slowly as there are a great number of younger Chinese Leaders waiting for the old Maoists to die out.

China is attempting to develop their own consumer market because of the completely failure of the plan which attempted to use the influence of Loans and Exports to the U.S. as leverage to effect U.S. Foreign Policy.

It was a failure of epic proportions by the Chinese Communist Leadership and we have them by the balls right now.

AA

 

We don't have any need for Carrier Battle Groups because we don't face any significant naval force from any nation anywhere in the world.

You also mention the deactivated frigates and we also have deactivated destroyers that can be called back into service if need ever dictates. Certainly a "war" would warrant calling up the Navy Reserves and the re-activating of our "moth-balled" naval forces. Additionally, because of technological advancements in our weapons systems, we don't have the same necessity for the "number of ships" that were once required. That's an advantage of technology. It reduces the number of ships required while retaining and even increasing the mission capability of a much smaller naval force.

The Ticonderoga-class cruisers, Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, Los Angeles-class attack submarines, and new Ford class carriers are far more capable from a "mission" standpoint than their predecessors and we require far fewer of them.

 

Lolz at lefties proclaiming significant threats.

 

Then the "lefties" are idiots just like "righties" proclaiming there are significant threats. Excluding a nuclear war with Russia there are no significant threats to the United States today. Not even China has enough nuclear weapons and delivery systems to seriously threaten the United States and while we could be attacked we could never been defeated by either Russia or China. Russia and China are very much aware of that fact which is why neither, either independently or as allies, would ever even consider attacking the United States.

 

Yeah, the military brass are "idiots".

There are more threats today then there were 8 years ago. Regardless of your take on the war on terror-its not going away. Regardless of your take on our major geopolitical adversaries-they aren't going away.

We have already given up much of the military strength we had at the time the USSR fell. We have already given up the temporary increase for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And the major high end systems (aircraft, naval warships) all take years to build and develop.

The US has always tried to maintain a strategic superiority (technological and numerical), its a bad idea to give those up and more costly in the long run-including potentially American lives. We aren't talking about upland bird hunting here-when it comes to the military whats "sporting" or "fair" isn't even on my radar.

 

In this, I completely agree. With the following caveat:

If we are at a wartime footing.

99.9% of the time, we are not as such a footing. We conduct almost no "combat patrols", most of what we have out like that excluding our carriers are on training missions, and most likely unarmed. On a nation like Guam, or Okinawa, or even the US, there are actually damned few forces that are "armed and ready to respond" if an enemy was suddenly to rise of and show their head.

Think to 1941. We were just starting to gear up into a war footing, and we still got clobbered all over the Pacific. If some nation was to try and take Guam, and we had no warning, I bet they would be able to do so.

When I was stationed at Seal Beach in the 1980's, there were probably 500 or so military members on that base. And of those, only around 30 or so at any time were armed. And at most, a total force of under 100 could be armed. Each with maybe 200 or so rounds of ammunition each. No grenades, no machine guns, nothing heavier then M-16 rifles.

This is the norm for a force in garrison during peace time in an area considered "secure". Even at Fort Bliss, home of our Air Defense Artillery (PATRIOT and THAAD), not a single launcher has missiles. In fact, there are no missiles anywhere on that base, they would have to run some down from White Sands, where they keep them primarily for testing purposes.

In a theoretical Mexican-American War II, Mexico could launch a storm of SRBMs and Cruise Missiles, as well as attack aircraft at Fort Bliss, and there would not be a damned thing that could be done ot stop it. Even though there are at any time probably 4 Battalions of PATRIOT and 2 Batteries of THAAD. Because they are not set up to operate, and have no missile to fire even if they were.

Read what I wrote above.

Now, consider this. I already discussed one such attack which had indeed been done against the US, and took out pretty much everything we had West of Hawaii. And we had one of the most powerful military forces in the world at the time.

Now let me bring up something else.

One of the most respected novelests on military matters in the 20th century was Tom Clancey. And one of his books discussed exactly such an attack, Debt of Honor. Where a major military force was able to take over Saipan and Guam with little resistance.

Remember, the Soviet Union took over the government of Afghanistan with little opposition, because of maskirovka. We have very little active military force on Guam that could repel an unexpected invasion at this time. If China was to dump 2 motorized divisions on Guam, how long do you think the forces there would last?

Probably not even as long as the forces there lasted the last time that happened.

Assuming that such a task force is in place in the first place.

Why do so many people simply assume that any future adversary will simply declare war against us days or weeks in advance, then give us the time needed to get our forces into position?

When was the last time the US got involved in a war, where the other side said "We are going to go to war with you, so get ready"? I can really only think of 2. The War of 1812, and the Civil War.

If a nation goes to war, it is generally not caring at all about trade. It goes to a wartime economy, where everything is deficit spending, and all production goes to war goods. Trade with the outside world (other than imports or exports to allies) largely stops, the sending of widgets and thingamabobs is ended for the duration.

I think what amazes me so much here, are 2 things.

First, how little most have learned from history. Did Hitler warn Poland or the USSR he was about to attack them? Did North Korea warn South Korea? Did Japan warn the United States and UK? Did Iraq warn Kuwait they were about to be taken out?

Most military actions take one of 2 forms. Either it is a long simmering conflict that finally boils over into open warfare, or it is a fast sneak-attack, where the other side has absolutely no idea it is coming before it is over.

And this "Der, we will win because we are 'Merica and der greatest" makes me think that many in here are outright braindead Trump True Believers (I am talking about those that simply parrot his sayings without any thought behind if they are real or not). Naw, facts and reason and examples and plans do not matter. 'Merica is great, so we will win!

And yea, if another war does come, I do not expect it to be "sporting or fair" at all. I would expect it to be more or less like Pearl Harbor. Or 9/11.

Waking up in the morning, thinking everything is just fine and good. Then before you know it we are blindsided with no idea we were even in danger in the first place.

 

I am aware that the U.S. Navy is not on a Combat Footing right at the moment but that could quickly change.

China however has very little in the way of any viable Naval Force and we would know well before China was sending any naval forces that they would be coming.

That old Soviet Carrier the Chinese are basically floating around on is worthless and it is not even worth training on.

The ONLY Nation I worry about is North Korea because they could do a lot of damage to the South before we stopped them.

Sure we would win....but unless we hit them first they would most likely make it into Seoul.

AA

 

And you make some valid points there.

If you have not done so, I suggest reading "Debt of Honor". The invasion fleet arrived in Saipan and Guam not through military ships, but commercial ones.

I am one that readily laughs at the ide aof commercial ships being used for combat missions. However, that is only during a time of conflict. If such were used to covertly land forces somewhere, there would really be absolutely nothing to detect.

Remember, this is not paranoia, simply an analysis. Do I honestly believe that China is going to invade Guam with car carriers and other RORO ships? No, of course not. But that does not discount the fact that if they did so, the US would not even know it was happening until it was all over. And then it is not holding them back and preventing the invasion, it is now taking back an island that is held by the enemy, who has huge numbers of US citizens as hostages.

Remember, the idea of somebody taking a passenger jumbo jet and using it to crash into a building as a form of attack was also unthought of prior to September 2001. Well, other then in the mind of a novelist.

 

But we really cannot afford to have forces on combat alert for possible events.

China would lose and lose big militarily, economically and politically so the chances of such an invasion are tiny.

Areas we really need to spend money on are Robotic Drones, Direct Energy Weapons and Electronic Warfare.

You and I both know there are at least 25 programs on hold for the Navy because they don't want to spend money on them because they are waiting for the Direct Energy Weapons Systems.

AA

 

And show me where I say that we should?

Remember, I am not paranoid. I do not believe that at any moment somebody is going to attack us with little to no warning.

But thinking that such is not possible is arrogant and stupid. And also is in complete ignorance of a great many times where exactly that has happened in the past.

And as for "China loosing", that all depends on what they hope to achieve. Look to WWII, and what Japan had hoped to achieve, and what they thought the US reaction would be. The problem here with this very thought, is that you are assuming that any potential adversary is going to think like we do. Meanwhile, they are going to be making their own assumptions on how we would react, based upon what they think.

Remember, in WWII Japan honestly thought they would take over our islands in the Western Pacific, destroy our fleet, and we would just roll over and give them what they want. Why? Well, because they are Japan, of course.

It is foolish to try and assume that any adversary (potential or actual) is going to behave logically and rationally according to your concepts. That is one of the very first things I do when making an analysis. I ignore politics, beliefs, feelings, and all other things and simply look at what is and what is not possible. I did not address "will China take over Guam", simply "could China take over Guam".

One is a political topic the other is military. And I was looking at the possability, not the likelyhood.

 

Well I absolutely agree we should be prepared.

But I am also keenly aware because I was there and saw the effects of how U.S. Forces were not provided the tools and protection they needed during combat because we were spending money on other programs that were not relevant at the time.

We have some very good and high tech Ultra-Light Body Armor but it is not standard issue and it should be!!!

And look at the poor Humvee Armor issue and the fix sucks!!

AA

 

Just to add I think it to be highly improbable that China could in any way HIDE preparation of a sneak invasion of U.S. Territory.

The NSA would intercept the communication for even the PLANNING of such a sneak attack.

AA

 

As far as Japan in WWII the majority of the Japanese Imperial Navy Leadership did not believe for a second that they would be able to successful accomplish a conquest against the United States in the Pacific.

The Japanese Army Leadership who were actually running the show did believe this even after the Naval Leadership told them such an attack would be foolhardy.

But the Army forced the attack so the Japanese Navy attempted a Knockout Blow which they came close to.

But the Japanese Navy KNEW in the long run this attack was a mistake.

AA

 

This is why its so important to be students of history-to keep our bearings. I read history not just because its fascinating in its own right but because it helps us to look forward to the future. Looking back to see forward so to speak. When I hear comments like "there are no threats, we will be fine-its not in anyone's interests to attack us-Im seeing back in time-to Neville Chamberlain, to every person smacked in the face by reality back then.

Part of it is not wanting to acknowledge that bad things can and will happen. Part of it is ignorance. But it also displays how hard it is to drag humans out of the stone age-even westerners quickly forget how to think, how to be rational.

I don't know if it was my age, or just where I was in life at age 20, but 9/11 hit me hard. I know it hit friends hard as well. Long story short it drove home that these were not abstractions-things were happening elsewhere that personally impacted me. It was then I figured out what others considered fair or sporting, and how different other peoples mindsets are. Its tragic, but its reality-it has to be dealt with.

In the battleship thread it was pointed out (maybe by you, maybe AR) that our nations pinnacle weapons systems will be what we go to total war with-there wont be time to build more. We can not afford to let our edge slide, particularly as other nations edge closer to us. Its like watching a train wreck in slow motion.

Im just a student/fan of military history, I can imagine its an order of magnitude more frustrating to see these things with the first hand knowledge our military members have. I guess on the flip side there are likely things that our military knows aren't a problem, that the average civilian thinks is.

 

Ive got a good buddy who was a CIA analyst. He was also a FDNY paramedic (left just prior to 9/11) and now a PA.
He's a brilliant mind, we have heated discussions at times, including in the operating room.

What he did as a CIA analyst was look at the data, and give US policy recommendations using the data sources that were accepted upon. Cold and impartial. Just the facts, with the given (and demonstrated) ability to back them.

I can keep up with him, but its only because Im a student of logic, I haven't forgotten how to think. He beats me more than I beat him, but I suspect we are both better for it.

Some forumites claim to have a certain background, as with high govt credentials. Ok...but I also recognize flaws in logic and reason. I know how the govt can be (don't get me started), and I also know how people (of any type) are. More importantly I recognize its the indian, not the arrow.

Im trying to say I can often times smell what people are cooking. But that means I also smell when nobody is home. Like some of our "former CIA" (sooo proud to say it) members.

 

Allo, mate.

Can you provide citations (including actual numbers) that demonstrate that "the majority of the Japanese Imperial Navy Leadership did not believe for a second that they would be able to successful accomplish a conquest against the United States in the Pacific."?

Im from Missouri, lefty-show me.

 

I have no idea where you get your information but in 1941 the US was a third-rate military nation. We didn't emerge as a military world power until about 1/2 way through the Second World War. Japan and Germany (and Russia) were the major military nations in 1941 even rendering the British as a third-rate military power. Germany could have invaded and occupied the UK if it hadn't made the strategic mistake of ending the bombing campaign of the British airfields to focus on the bombing of civilian targets (in response to British bombing of civilian targets).

We need to always remember that it was the Russians that ultimately defeated the Germans and not the Americans and British. The invasion of Normandy was a diversionary attack to draw off German forces from the Eastern Front to enable the Russians to defeat the Germans. All of the major European battles against Germany occurred on the Eastern Front.

Finally, with satellite surveillance technology, no nation can mount a surprise sea-borne attack against the United States today. We can and do track every significant surface naval deployment by every nation around the world. We know where they are and where they appear to be going. A surprise attack against US territories, such as occurred at the beginning of WW II, is impossible today.

 

Different topic, once again about how the military is allowed to do it's spending.

The problem with the HMMWV and having no armor was first addressed in the early 1990's after the Gulf War. Remember, this was a vehicle designed and intended to be used in a future European war. Where you had all sorts of things like trees, buildings, and the like to hide behind and blend with. This was not the case in the Middle East, so they were horribly vulnerable.

But when the military asked for the funding to research a replacement or upgrade for the HMMWV in the early 1990's (when the vehicle was less then 10 years old), they were told basically to go away, they were not going to get the money, and live with it.

It took another decade and another war for this issue to finally be looked at seriously. And it takes years for something like an uparmored HMMWV to go from concept to a delivered product. But when there is no conflict, the American people largely have no interest in spending the money on something like this. "Oh, we are at peace, why waste money on a new vehicle that is not needed, when instead we can spend the money better in giving free pens and paper to geriatrics going to college?"

Then suddenly when a new conflict jumps up, it is simply to late to do anything about it. Then people start screaming that men and women in uniform are dying and it is the fault of everybody but themselves. And I do not say it is their fault, but they are not a minor part of the problem to begin with.

Sure they could. Hell, look how many ships Japan was able to assemble and sail all the way from Japan to Hawaii without being detected.

As for preparations, those are simple to hide. Do you know how hard it is to hide an Infantry Division? Think about this.

The Super Bowl a few months ago was attended by over 100,000 people. That is roughly 8 Infantry Divisions worth of people. Do you really think it is impossible to move 100,000 people around in a nation the size of China, and it would not be detected? It would be a stupid-simple exercise. As for their equipment, China owns a large fleet of RORO ships, most of them in commercial service and crewed entirely by their own citizens (most in fact crewed by members of the PLAN).

Scatter the equipment in 3 or 4 different ports, and move the ships from one to the other, onloading and offloading equipment at each port. Load and offload conventional civilian equipment by day, load the military equipment only at night. None of our spy birds have the kind of resolution to determine if a truck being loaded at 2am is a civilian or military cargo truck. If the semi trailer loaded is a standard road hauler, or a tarp covered missile launcher.

Doing so is simply a logistics exercise. And if they wanted to use airborne troops, it is even easier. Simply load the appropriate aircraft and send them out as charter flights. Remember, that is exactly what the Soviets did. And with thousands of such flights going on every day, nobody is going to even blink at that.

And we had most of the same technology for observing force build ups and movements today that we did in 1979. And in 1979 the majority of these systems were looking directly at the Soviet Union. And we did not detect anything until they had landed large amounts of forces and equipment in Afghanistan. The same way we did not detect any of the build up prior to Iraq streaming into Kuwait.

Oh really?

First of all, starting a war is not a military decision, it is a political one. Political leaders make these decisions unless the government is run by a military junta. So what the military thinks is inconsequential. Think on Iraq in 1990 and 2003. Does anybody there think that the Iraqi military thought they could win against the US coalition? And does anybody think that mattered a damn to the political leadership?

And actually, there was only one military leader of consequence that was opposed to the war with the US. And that was Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto.

Of course, it must also be remembered that Admiral Yamamoto was opposed to the Sino-Japanese War and the invasion of Manchuria (even though he was put in charge of that invasion). Admiral Yamamoto opposed the war with the US because he spent years in the US himself, and was more then aware of our character when it comes to being attacked (look at Western movies of the era to get an idea), as well as our awesome industrial capabilities. Most of Japan was still run by human and animal power. Where as in the US all but the absolute poorest had automobiles and tractors. He realized that those same factories could be quickly converted to producing tanks and military trucks.

The Admiral realized that the real winner was not the one with the best fighting spirit (which he knew the Japanese had), but the one with the most powerful logistical and industrial might.

Hmmm, sorry, wrong.

The group that actually ran Japan was the Taisei Yokusankai, or "Imperial Rule Assistance Association". And this was assisted to a lesser degree by the Zaibatsu.

The Taisei Yokusankai was essentially the Japanese Fascist Party. This was the organization led by the Prime Minister, advised by the Gozen Kaigi (often called the "Imperial Council), which then came to important decisions which were then presented to the Emperor for his approval. And that council was made up of major leaders in the area of finance, politics, and the military (with the Army and Navy having equal say). And the council only brought proposals to the Emperor once they had already achieved a unanimous decision.

So the 2 Sino-Japanese Wars, the Russo-Japanese War, entry into WWI and joining the Tripartite Pact, those were all discussed by the Gozen Kaigi and presented to the Emperor by unanimous declaration of support. The same way the proposal to attack the US and UK in 1941 was presented and agreed upon unanimously.

In fact, only one time did the Gozen Kaigi ever bring a topic to the Emperor for mediation. And this was when they were hopelessly deadlocked over accepting surrender to end WWII. They went to Emperor Showa hopelessly deadlocked at 3-3 and the Emperor essentially told them the war had to end. Only with this did the 3 holdouts flip their vote and the war ended.

For those like me that have studied early Showa era Japan in depth, the fact that the Army and Navy were at war with each other almost as much as with foreign nations is well known. Both the Army and Navy thought they could win the war in the Pacific, because they were Nippon. The German Aryan mythology has nothing on the beliefs of Japan for their own supremacy and divine nature. Hitler had to largely adopt and create such a mythos, Japan had already been living it for thousands of years. With their own legends of divine intervention no less.

Only Yamamoto's innermost clique were unsure of their eventual victory. They knew they could great damage to the US, and take all of the US-UK territories in the West Pacific. Those were military decisions, and there was little dobt that they could be done. Now what would happen after that, those were pure political decisions.

Japan believed in their supremacy, and that the US-UK would simply capitulate - if for no other reason that Emperor Showa was "the Juggernaught, (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)". They honestly believed that by destroying most of the Pacific fleet in Pearl Harbor, then in destroying the remaining fleet in a decisive battle would be enough to force the US to give in to the rightful demands of Japan. And to those ends is why most of their remaining fleet was steaming to take over the island of Midway when a huge chunk of both fleets were destroyed.

However, the US was able to rebuild their losses and more, and Japan was never able to recover. But even until August 1945, the leadership of Japan was still sure that they would be able to pull out of the war as victors.

 

That was me.

When a nation is actually at war, it is pretty much to late to do much R&D. At that time, you are to busy trying to fight off aligators while you drain the swamp. You just do not have the available resources to try and redirect the aligators in the first place.

Now the US is rather unique, in that it's former (former) industrial capacity let them do both at once. They could conduct large amounts of R&D and still produce the equipment needed. However, even then in a great many ways they did not. Sure, we could have developed a better tank then the Sherman in WWII, but why? They were cheap, fast to build, and failry reliable. So we sent out tens of thousands of inferior tanks.

Germany on the other hand tried to do both, and miserably failed. They wasted a great deal of their industrial capacity in developing "uber weapons", to the detriment of their military capability. And both the USSR and Germany had some impressive rocket programs, even though they were in completely different directions.

The Germans built the first Cruise and Ballistic missiles (V1, V2), but these were largely terror weapons that were not all that effective militarily. The Soviets however created the rocket which is largely ignored by history. And the thing is that it probably had much more of an impact on the battlefield and the war then both V rockets combined.

The lowly Katyusha.

Small, short range, only around 50 pounds of explosives in the warhead. These sound anything but impressive. However, once somebody actually saw what they could do, it became obvious that these weapons were the true rocket gamechangers in the war.

A Katyusha battery was a battery of 4 trucks with a launching system on the back. And in 7-10 seconds, that battery could launch over 4 tons of high explosives, over a 400,000 square meter impact zone. That would be the equivelent of a 72 gun artillery bombardment. And that battery could reload in less then 5 minutes, and do it all over again.

The Soviets did relatively little R&D during WWII. But what they did do was brilliant. It was simple, easy to build and mass produce, and won the war.

But yea, that was me that talked about a nation going to war with what it already has when the war starts. And this is true, just look at what we brought to the Gulf War. The war started and ended with the same equipment we had before it began. And even in Iraq, very little new equipment came out.

Yea, we got upgrades on some equipment, but other then a few IED vehicles there was really nothing "new". We left Iraq using 98% of the equipment we had when we went in with. And 90% of the equipment that was "new" was not new, simply a replacement for 80's era equipment that was hopelessly out of date. And there were a few items which were also 80's era tech, but simply repurposed and used in a new way (C-RAM was simply taking a CIWS unit off a ship and putting it on a trailer).

Other then a vehicle like the MRAP, I really can't think of anything "new" that was used in GWOT that was not simply a minor improvement from what we went into that conflict with. And even the MRAP was not "new". The concept started as a "Technical" where the Rhodesian Army bolted armor onto some 1960's trucks to help defeat the mines that guerrilla forces were using. GWOT was the first war since WWII were US forces were facing large number of anti-vehicle land mines so there was a need for something to help defeat them.

And that is exactly how I approach these topics. Purely as a logic exercise.

I bring into play 3 major abilities. The first of them is logic, something I literally grew up with. My mom was a computer programmer starting back in the 1960's, and as I grew up she was always playing "logic games" with me, teaching me analytical thinking without my even realizing it. And in the 1970's I started programming, where logic is a requirement and personal beliefs play no part at all.

I add to that my love of history, and my various experiences in the military. A much lesser factor I bring in is my voratious reading, primarily science fiction (primarily "alternate history"), which leaves me mentally flexible. I try to track not only trends, but how unexpected events can cause unexpected results almost in a "butterfly effect" style.

However, I also remain firmly rooted in reality, and the here and now. The only real time that a "miracle weapon" made a real impact in a war was WWII with the atomic bomb. But even that only ended the war sooner with less loss of life, it did not really change the outcome of the war itself. Even if the discovery of the bomb was reversed with the Japanese Ni-Go project getting there first and using "the bomb" on US forces, I have little doubt that the Allies would have won the war. They simply had the initiative and resources, which by that time Japan was almost running on empty.

 

What a Waste, the US Military



http://original.antiwar.com/engelhardt/2016/04/10/waste-us-military/


Late last year, I spent some time digging into the Pentagon’s “reconstruction” efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, countries it invaded in 2001 and 2003 in tandem with a chosen crew of warrior corporations. As a story of fabled American can-do in distant lands, both proved genuinely dismal no-can-do tales, from roads built (that instantly started crumbling) to police academies constructed (that proved to be health hazards) to prisons begun (that were never finished) to schools constructed (that remained uncompleted) to small arms transfers (that were “lost” in transit) to armies built, trained, and equipped for stunning sums (that collapsed). It was as if nothing the Pentagon touched turned to anything but dross (including the never-ending wars it fought). All of it added up to what I then labeled a massive “$cam” with American taxpayer money lost in amounts that staggered the imagination.

All of that came rushing back as I read TomDispatch regular William Hartung’s latest post on “waste” at the Pentagon. It didn’t just happen in Kabul and Baghdad; it’s been going on right here in the good old USA for, as Hartung recounts, the last five decades. There’s only one difference I can see: in Kabul, Baghdad, or any other capital in the Greater Middle East and Africa, if we saw far smaller versions of such “waste” indulged in by the elites of those countries, we would call it “corruption” without blinking. So here’s my little suggestion, as you read Hartung: think about just how deeply what once would have been considered a Third World-style of corruption is buried in the very heart of our system and in the way of life of the military-industrial complex. By now, President Dwight Eisenhower must be tossing and turning in his grave.






The USA can easily fight and win any war it wants. Instead, it prefers to give more welfare to the wealthy elites who start and perpetuate these endless wars of treason.












`

 

Hmmm, yes and no. Yes, and no.

Yes, we were already a "military world power", and had been so since the dawn of the 20th century. Remember, by the time of WWII we had been involved in 3 International Wars, and been on the winning side in all 3 of them.

First, the Spanish-American War. With that, we suddenly found ourselves in possession of former Spanish colonies, as far away as the Philippines. This made us expand our military in a way that we had never needed before. Our Navy suddenly had to go from being simply a regional power to an International one.

Then we had the Boxer Rebellion. This had many ramifications, including finally reconciling with England. It also forced us for the first time to take part in an "International Military Expedition", with the militaries of several nations, including England, Germany, Russia, and Japan. And in the aftermath we now had control of the peacekeeping mission of a large chunk of China, which once again made us expand our military and operations overseas.

Then finally, WWI. Where we realized that another nation could try to get us involved in a war, if we wanted it or not.

The only thing really lacking in the US military at the time was equipment. And that was not even in quality, but numbers. When war broke out in Europe, we already had the P-40 Warhawk and the B-25 Mitchell in prototype or early deployment, and the B-17 was already being deployed to forces in the US and overseas. We also had the 3 Yorktown class aircraft carriers in service, considered by most to be the best carriers in the first half of the war (and vastly superior to the Shōkaku class Japanese carriers). They were second only to the Essex class carriers which were being built at the time that the US entered the war.

The only thing really lacking in the US military at the start of WWII was numbers. In 1939, the size of the entire US military was set by congress, and was just under 335,000 personnel. But that number was not going to remain at that level for long. At the time of Pearl Harbor, the US military had already swelled to almost 3.5 million, and was rapidly growing. And the US had already shifted largely to wartime production, with tanks and destroyers and fighters and bombers already streaming off of the production lines.

By the time the US was really deeply involved in the war in 1943, there were over 9 million personnel in uniform.

No, the US military was not even close to being a "third-rate military nation". We were already a world power, with large bases in the Philippines, and military outposts in Guam, Midway, and other islands across the Pacific. I am not sure where you are getting this impression, but it is very wrong.

Heck, in December 1941 we had over 150,000 personnel in the Philippines alone. Armed with some of the most modern dissapearing gun carriage anti-ship artillery in the world. And the air forces included P-40 Warhawks and B-17 bombers. And more equipment was being brought in as fast as possible. If the Japanese had waited another 4-6 months, many question if they could have even taken the islands at all. The modernization and expansion of US forces in the Philippines even in late 1941 was staggering.

Do not forget the flight of B-17 aircraft that were flying without weapons or ordinance that landed in Hawaii as the attack was taking place. That was a single flight of 12 B-17 bombers, that were on their way from California to the Philippines. That one flight would have expanded the B-17 force by over 25%, and the US was expecting to send around 12 planes a month. The main delay in increasing the forces were the limited number of carriers. The Enterprise and Lexington were almost constantly steaming from the mainland to American bases overseas transporting fighters as fast as possible. And the USS Saratoga was being rushed into service after refitting so she could assist in doing this.

Heck, the entire Japanese fleet had only 9 Battleships. The US had 8 Battleships in the Pacific Fleet alone, and 18 battleships in total. Ranging from pre-WWI era USS Wyoming, the 2 brand new North Carolina class battleships, and the 3 Colorado class Battleships. Both North Carolina class ships were undergoing sea trials in preperation for their first operational deployments when the war broke out. And all 4 South Dakota class ships were in the final shipyard stages for commissioning and were expected to enter service in mid-1942.

That is a hell of a lot of firepower for a "third rate military". And we will not even start with the Essex class carriers, already being built when the US entered the war.

As for where I get my information, it is not all that hard. Even a simple look at Wikipedia will give you almost everything I just discussed. Start at the Iowa class Battleships, and then step back through each class that came before. Look at the numbers, and when they were built. The US had the largest and most modern battleship fleet in the world in 1940. And was already in the early stages of building the largest carrier fleet in the world.