Quote:
Originally Posted by Raellus
With the Army and Marine Corps baying for combat replacements, could the Navy, now sans most of its surface fleet and aerial assets, make a strong enough case to hold on to its beached personnel to convice the JCS (or CivGov alternative) to keep their hands off its people?
|
I would think that's doubtful. Most of the differentiation between the services today is political in nature. Take out the politicians, and reduce the power and influence of the navy and air force and the army will likely get anything and everything they want, at least in Europe. The Navy and Air Force personnel will be dependant on the army to keep them safe and supplied and it could be expected that the army wouldn't be adverse to using a little "blackmail" from time to time to get their own way - you give us 100 men and we'll feed you....
The main issue here is that come 1998 and the collapse of the US government, the military holds the reins. The Politicians are either dead, out of contact, or simply irrelevant to what's going on in the war zones. Come 1999 when the supplies from CONUS have stopped even the most loyal soldier will have to be thinking twice about paying more than lip service to whatever "power" is attempting to guide what's going on.
Even without those factors, the complete lack of replacement shipping any time in the forseeable future makes holding back manpower for active duty completely absurd. That is true whether they're used on the front lines as combat replacements, or behind the lines as MPs, logisitics, etc.