In my opinion the “National Security Act of 1947” AND “Goldwater-Nichols(1986)” have been DISASTERS for the Security of our “once-”great” Nation.
So, I guess U.S. air defense would be left up to citizens on the ground shooting up with their hunting rifles?
It’s a stupid thought
It is fair enough and it worth a discussion.
The intra-service rivalries are very costly.
I tend to agree with the author. You need ground to place an Air Force Base. To get that ground you need the Navy and the Army — both of which already have their own aircraft.
...but then again, I’m speaking as a Navy vet.
Let’s just get rid of Air Force One.
I wouldn’t even read the article when I saw James Carroll had written it.
I gave up The Globe after many years because of writers like this guy.
.
That’s about as stupid as saying we should eliminate the U.S. Marines.Afterall the Army can also make Amphibious landings onto the worlds beaches.
Each one of these services is there for a reason.The Air Force was once part of the Army and the reason the Air Corp became the Air Firce was that the congress believed that nation needed an Independent Air Force.
The "shameful" war record you refer to started with Viet Nam when politicians started thinking they could manage a war better than generals could. Politicians have no business running a war...they lack the stones to do what's necessary without considering the political implications on their next run for office. To every politician who thinks they can do a better job, get your outta-shape ass out of DC, strap on an 80 backpack, and move to the front lines and then, and only then, are you in a position to make a suggestion as to what is to be done next. Making our troops wait for some political hack in DC to decide whether or not to take out a position that is killing our troops is assine. Let the experts make the decisions, not some two-faced politician sitting in his multi-million dollar office in DC.
It makes more sense to greatly down size the Marine Corps and transfer its duties to the Army. Maybe, just a thought, in the form of more airborne units.
I have often thought, and western civ/history seems to confirm, that our liberty, republic and pocket books would all be better served with a peace time military establishment comprised of:
1. A large, modern, and widely deployed professional Federal Navy comprised of a submarine, surface, and air arm second to none. It would combine the current Navy and Coast Guard and strategic/tactical air forces. It would perform the full scope of force projection and continental air and coastal defense. There could be a cadre reserve component to rapidly expand its TOE in the event of war. They should be prohibited from police or law enforcement except for Coast Guard type activities.
2. A full time professional Federal Marine Corps/naval infantry as we have now to remain the point of the spear and rapid reaction force. They should also be prohibited from any activity in law enforcement or domestic security. Of course fully integrated armor, arty, and MAC/TAC would be in this force.
3. A very small cadre professional army (10%+/- of a fully mobilized force) backed up by a greatly expanded part time state controlled National Guard that also replaced the Reserves component of the Army/Marines. Think the Swiss system (and our own pre-1916 system) combined with an improved Heinlein’s Starship Troopers concept of natural rights for all, but voting rights only coming with “citizenship”. “Citizenship” which itself comes from life long reserve military service. States appoint and fund and train all NG troops and officers who have equal standing with the Federal cadre forces. The NG would also replace the federal FEMA role.
4. A small federal air force responsible for SAC missiles and missile defense combined with NASA for space exploration and defense.
Will never happen since money and power is involved. Just dreaming of a free and well armed society decentralized to the state and local level that would require widespread popular support for foreign adventures.
So douse me in kerosene and flame away.
The article follows many that decry amy military power, at all.
For example:
1. Mourn the Battleship, many submissions, many Communists performing self-gratification (this is a nice public reading forum, so I comply.).
2. Mourn the Submarine;
3. Tear Down the Air Force, (using minor things as drones that seem to make major news items)
4. The Army needs to be de-populized in a peacetime economy (Jimmy Carter ran with this one).
5. Because of ICBM’s, we don’t need a surface Navy.
6. Since we do not have major police actions, we don’t need the Marines.
Do you get the train of thought here, folks?
All of these types of column submissions are always running rampant during Democratic administrations.
I’m a proud USAF retiree, don’t wear it on my sleeve much, if at all and could accept logical and rational criticism, but this guy, no.
Not much “food” there...more like a few kibbles.
The author benefits from having 20/20 hindsight and from ignoring the strategic ramifications of having beauracrats and politicians interfere in military planning and operations.
This, for example; “The Air Force created myths of “gaps” — first bomber, then missile — that existed only in the minds of wing-wearing planners...”
Sure, it’s easy to look back on it now, over 40-50 years later and say how deceptive the planners were...but were they really deceptive? Or were they responding to the advances in technology and intelligence to ensure the USA had the edge in any potential conflict with the Soviets?
“...even as Air Force strategic bombing has long since proved to be irrelevant in asymmetrical wars, whether against the Vietnamese, Iraqi insurgents, or Al Qaeda.”
ROE in each of those campaigns directly influenced the effectiveness of our airmen and aircraft.
IOW, IMO, the author is an idiot...
It’s time to abolish old media newspapers like the Boston Globe.
In the past 50 years, the US Air Force kept the Soviet Union from waging nuclear war on us. The US Air Force kept the communists from taking over South Korea and Western Europe. In the past 50 years, the US spent seventeen trillion dollars in The War On Poverty, and to what end? Generations of welfare recipients whose only accomplishment is that they vote Democrat. It’s time for that Peace Dividend from The War On Poverty.
James Carroll's father, Joseph Carroll, was a Lieutenant General in the Air Force and the founding director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI).
James has been working through the implications of that his whole life, largely in public.
Curiously, both father and son started out studying for the priesthood.
Will these really be accomplished? I'm not so certain about the first - going from a three-way rivalry to a two-way one does not necessarily mean lessening its expense. Collapsing commands may, however, save money by eliminating officer billets if that is an added criterion. Most peacetime services do tend to be quite top-heavy: having more admirals than ships is absurd.
Focusing tactics is a bit of a sore spot among the Army especially, whose advocates see ground-support assets such as the A-10 being pushed aside in favor - as they see it - of the glory of the high fliers. We have, after all, fought a number of ground wars since WWII but rather less in terms of air wars, at least in terms of air supremacy. That's what our money has bought us.
I'd like to throw out a third arena, though, that isn't covered by Army or Navy needs but is addressed by the Air Force - space. Here we have two difficulties: first that actual operations there are classified and little available to the general public, because second, space is nominally demilitarized by international law. Save your laughter, it really is, and that tends to make operations there very black, and procurement for those operations very difficult for us arm-chair types to judge.
I'm not certain that consolidating services will help this last arena very much. I do think that all the services could benefit a great deal from a top-down haircut in terms of officer billets.
Thoughts? What did I miss?
How much money does it cost to have duplicate administrative functions, for separate branches?
Doesn’t that duplication detract from direct line capability?