It’s time for a return of our army back to its traditional small size which is consistent both with our needs and our oldest republican foundations.
Which has made us under-prepared for every war.
Huh?
Ever hear of a BIG STICK?
In times of peace, the big stick stays ready in the corner because it WILL be needed again.
I’d prefer military spending than handouts to those who are abusing the system.
It is NOT consistent with our needs.
I wrote earlier today on a prior thread herein, but I obviously must reiterate.
An observer of US history will note that the tragic consequences of such unpreparedness is that the time lag required to bring the armed forces up to a fighting posture when needed has always been paid for in the blood of young Americans and at exorbitant costs. If you think that is okay, I recommend that you see if you can find a survivor of the early period of the Korean war and inquire. There may still be a few of those heroes around, but very few. You perhaps can still find a WWII survivor and inquire as to how it felt to go up a German 88 with the weapons you had available. If you note, our forces were behind the power curve on the ground and in the air. Personally, I think it is criminal to knowingly put our forces in that position again.
The powers that be have thought this way before. After WWII and with the advent of nuclear weapons, boots on the ground were to be an antiquated ancient means of warfare. Then came Korea and Task Force Smith. Mutual Assured Destruction not withstanding, we have bled on the ground in numerous places anyway. The reason we now have young sergeants with 10 - 12 deployments was the Clinton reduction of the Army from a 16 to a 10 division force, his peace dividend, which necessitated more frequent tours. So we have increased rates of PTSD, suicide, and divorce for soldiers due to the stresses of back to back combat tours.
If one did not mind kicking over a few rice bowls to get there, completely restructuring the Armed Forces to look more like the USMC would provide huge cost savings. An organization where each deployable unit has its own air support, fire support, air and sea transportation assets, and a sustainable ground force. Get pilots out of aircraft, so the aircraft cost less. Eliminate the roles and missions arguments over rotary wing versus fixed wing aircraft and buy the most suitable aircraft for the job without it necessarily being one of two shades of blue or green.
Given the recognition of the realities of todays politics, I can just pray the future price our young must pay in blood for Hagels plans can be minimized.
I agree. A nation that sends hundreds of thousands of troops into military campaigns in Third World sh!t-holes halfway around the world while allowing tens of millions of foreign invaders to pour across its borders doesn’t need a large standing army. It needs a full-scale psychiatric examination.
In 1940 the United States Army had 269,023 active duty personnel. The population of the country at that time was 132.12 million.
Today we have 316.99 million in the U.S. To keep the same ratio, the Army should have 645,404. I am glad to see you support a robust defensive posture.