oh good, by dint of presidential fiat my country's military is being gutted today

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by ShadoWarrior

No cost overruns. Nice in theory. Not so easy in practice. What do you do when the unexpected happens? Kill the program(s)? There goes your "best, most advanced aircraft that we can field and in such numbers" such as the F-35. Killed by a budget axe because it went over-budget. Ditto almost every completely new weapon system. Missile defense? Over-budget. New ships? Over-budget. (Well, most of them. IIRC there's one class that came in under budget.)

Want to cut waste in the DOD? Cut out 99% of the nukes. Damned things are obscenely expensive to build and more so to maintain. We could do just fine with a tiny fraction of the inventory that we have. The hundreds of billions saved could go towards other, better weapon systems. But any time that anyone even hints at reducing the absurdly large stockpile that the U.S. has the right-wingnuts cry that whomever is suggesting it is a commie or some such nonsense.

Never made any claim that controlling overruns would be easy. But the entire process that DOD uses to buy equipment needs to be cleaned up, and preferably with C-4 and flamethrowers!!!! And a lot of the so-called contractors need to be guests of honor at an old style lynching!

The whole process of getting "the best price for our equipment" is insane. Take a look through the Congessional Records, look at what the winning bids were for virtually every weapons system used by the US in the last 40 years and you will see a cost overrun (and for every reason under the sun!). I accept that there can be overruns for legitimate reasons...but I also state that every possible effort should be made to keep the overruns to a minimum.

I agree that the nuclear arsenal is a waste of defence dollars. But the world is a harsh place and with nations like North Korea and possibly Iran getting their hands on nukes...if you believe that their current leadership won't hesitate to use them on US troops given half a chacne...then there is some prime farmland in the Everglades that I'd like to sell you!

Still, does the Air Farce need to maintain an aging arsenal of ICBMs. Nope, decommission them. Cruise missiles armed with nuclear warheads are a more efficient use.

Do we need a large arsenal of aircraft-deleivered nuclear bombs, nope, decommission them.

Does the Navy need to maintain its SLBM fleet. I'd have to agree with that, SSBNs are a hell of a lot harder to track and destroy than a static ICBM field in the Dakotas.

Does the Army need a stockpile of artillery-delivered nuclear missiles...nope. I'd even go as far as turning over the remaining Pershing fleet to the Air Force....in return for the A-10s that they don't want!

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Webstral

The US Navy definitely needs to be able to keep open the sea lanes that carry so much of the nation’s economic lifeblood. However, I’d be perfectly happy sharing this job with China. The Chinese Communist leadership has all but abandoned communism in favor of fascism. They recognize that economic well-being for the nation is the best and most cost-effective guarantee of the longevity of the current regime. So long as China continues to move forward economically and scientifically, there’s no real risk of Sino-American conflict. Therefore, they can help keep the sea lanes open. After all, the Chinese are arguably even more dependent upon maritime commerce than the US is.

Given the current regime in China, I'd be very relucant to trust (or share) control of the sea lines of communications (SLOC) to them. I am not stating that a Cold War II is about to break out. But simply that the USN needs to control these SLOCs vital to the US. Bit hard to do with the current administrations plans.

The Air Force does need a qualitative edge over its most likely rivals. How much of a qualitative edge is necessary is a matter for debate.

We can't be the world's policeman anymore, nor can we use our military to stiick the American way of life down the throats of every person on this planet. It tends to annoy the natives. What would be a good level for the Air Force? An air wing committed to NATO, another committed to South West Asia, 3-4 in the Pacific, and at least another 6-8 in the US and that would be the active duty Air Force, AFNG and Reserve should have another 10-14 air wings. And these would be combat aircraft, not including tankers and transports.

The Army… ah, the Army. I believe pre-positioning is wise. Additionally, though, we should eliminate 90% of the combat arms in the National Guard while moving most of non-combat brigades into the Army Reserve or the Army National Guard. Non-combat jobs are more forgiving of intermittent practice than combat jobs. The trigger pullers (including the tankers and cavalry, artillery, air defense, and combat engineers) need constant practice to stay at the top of their game. Once the balloon goes up, the combat arms brigades deploy with their organic support. Corps, and maybe divisional, support comes out of the reserve force. The reserves, by the way, should be expanded to at least twice their current size. Some support brigades would be earmarked as high-readiness, which would require the brigade to be ready to go in 30 days from mobilization. The line companies would be manned by folks who have a comparable civilian job, or the line companies would have an adjusted training schedule to keep the reservists fresh. High readiness would not be for everyone.

While we’re at it, though, the pay and privileges for the infantry and the infantry alone should be increased significantly. The Army needs to be in a position to refuse applicants for the infantry. Every private should be smart, fit, and motivated. There should be a backlog or waitlist so that any rifleman who can’t cut it or loses his motivation can be sent to another MOS—no harm, no foul. Thanks for trying; we still want you on the big team. Any soldier from another MOS can apply for the infantry at any time, just like Special Forces. Can one imagine what the Army might be able to accomplish if every battalion measured up to the Rhodesian Light Infantry?

As an added benefit, NCOs who either get tired of infantry life or who don’t make rank could transfer to another MOS after getting some retraining. These NCOs would carry the infantry mindset with them. This cannot help but be good for the other combat arms or the support types.

Of course, with a highly motivated Infantry Branch, the whole commissioning process would have to be reworked. I’ve said plenty about my views on the commissioning process, so I won’t repeat them here. But imagine, if you will, the effect of having second lieutenants who first had to earn their membership in a rifle company as a junior enlisted man and perhaps pass the grade as a team leader before being accepted into an officer training program. There might be a shortage of new lieutenants, but everyone in the platoon would have confidence that their platoon leader was the right man for the job.

PREACH ON BROTHER!!!!!

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

...nor can we use our military to stiick the American way of life down the throats of every person on this planet. It tends to annoy the natives.

Agree 10,000% with that! Bad enough that we have to endure American sitcoms.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Agree 10,000% with that! Bad enough that we have to endure American sitcoms.

Well, make some decent Australian sitcoms, I'll watch them!

But I've said that for a long time. You can't force democracy on a people at gunpoint. Pretty much, an outside culture cannot do "nation building." The people have to be ready for democracy and they have to want to come out of the stone age. The Afghan people aren't ready for either. Most of the rest of the Middle East are people who have a Middle Ages mindset but are playing with 21st century toys. That does make them dangerous, but no one can force them into the 21st century except the people of those countries themselves.

[Legbreaker]

The best that can really be done is containment while holding out the hand of friendship for those who want to get out.
However in places such as North Korea where knowledge of the outside world is STRICTLY controlled, many may not even know there IS an outside world, let alone it's potentially a better place to be.

[Targan]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

But I've said that for a long time. You can't force democracy on a people at gunpoint. Pretty much, an outside culture cannot do "nation building." The people have to be ready for democracy and they have to want to come out of the stone age. The Afghan people aren't ready for either. Most of the rest of the Middle East are people who have a Middle Ages mindset but are playing with 21st century toys. That does make them dangerous, but no one can force them into the 21st century except the people of those countries themselves.

All very true, Paul.

[ShadoWarrior]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Most of the rest of the Middle East are people who have a Middle Ages mindset but are playing with 21st century toys.

Most of the Muslim countries from North Africa to Pakistan are arguably still socially in the stone age. Women had more rights in the European feudal era than they do today in many so-called 'modern' Muslim nations. And tribalism, which pervades almost all Muslim countries, is a stone age concept. Nation is a bronze age invention, and these folks haven't yet grasped that simple concept.

Some people talk about bombing someone "back to the stone age". These so-called nations are still in the stone age. Cave dwellers with AKs. Or in the case of Pakistan, missiles and nukes.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Agree 10,000% with that! Bad enough that we have to endure American sitcoms.

It could be worse...try American sitcoms dubbed in German!

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

It could be worse...try American sitcoms dubbed in German!

I've heard the worst is Star Trek TOS dubbed in German!

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

I've heard the worst is Star Trek TOS dubbed in German!

It was bad....but the worst was Smoky and the Bandit in German!!!

I think I lost brain cells when I saw that one!

[Medic]

Originally Posted by ShadoWarrior

Most of the Muslim countries from North Africa to Pakistan are arguably still socially in the stone age. Women had more rights in the European feudal era than they do today in many so-called 'modern' Muslim nations. And tribalism, which pervades almost all Muslim countries, is a stone age concept. Nation is a bronze age invention, and these folks haven't yet grasped that simple concept.

Some people talk about bombing someone "back to the stone age". These so-called nations are still in the stone age. Cave dwellers with AKs. Or in the case of Pakistan, missiles and nukes.

As said earlier, the attempts to Westernisize the Middle Eastern countries are really as useful as teaching a fish to ride a unicycle. It might be entertaining at first, but with such fundamental differences, it has very little of a chance to work in reality. And the word is often, fundamental. Pun intended.

I can remember the Iraqi guy who went to High School with me - he was telling the class about Islam and said something along these lines: "The Shiites are really brutal and uncivilized - you steal, they cut off your hand from the wrist. We Sunnites are much more civilized - we only cut off your fingers."

The fact is, the U.S. of A. meant well by ridding Iraq of Saddam and removing Taleban from the seat of power in Afghanistan, but the attempts to "help" are most often misguided by misunderstanding the local culture. You can't just remove a head of state and tell the people of the said state they are now free to elect someone in his stead. That way you only create a vacuum of power - a vacuum that is going to be filled by something else, most often a puppet of the faction that removed the previous head of state.

A very good description of this particular thing is the episode of Over There, where the team enters a village in Iraq to provide protection for the negotiations between the villagers and the oil company that wants to build a pipeline next to the village. The oil company representative doesn't want to build a mosque for the village and encourages the wife of the local hardliner imam to demand for a school, which eventually leads to her banishment from the village by her own husband, partially because Dim tries to help her as well.

I'm not really saying all of the Americans are like this, but from what I've come to see is that most of you don't really see what goes on beyond the borders of your own state and even far less, beyond the U.S. borders. Of course this is a bit of generalization, just like saying most of the Muslim countries are socially in the stone ages. They are culturally very different from the western world and yes, they treat their women poorly, if they get out of line, but then again, there are some Christian factions that are just as stone aged, if you ask me. It doesn't matter, what the religion is - fundamentalists are fundamentalists everywhere and they act pretty much the same everywhere, no matter what the religion is.

As for the U.S. military diminishing it's power, I don't really see that generally as a bad thing. I can't say I'm anti-U.S., but I kind of frown to the way, you guys have driven your own agendas at gunpoint ever since the Iron Curtain came down. The appeasement policy the U.S. has towards Israel is something very disturbing - UN sanctions against Israel harassing people, who lived in the region before someone got the bright idea to actually erect a jewish colony there, can not be put in to action because the motions are vetoed by the U.S..

What the world would most definitely need is a bit broader point of view. And thus endeth the rant. No hard feelings, people. I know some very intelligent and nice Americans, who actually know where Finland is and have enough curiosity to get to know other cultures and societies.

[ArmySGT.]

So if I can wear the Crown for a day what would I do with the Dept of Defense.

1) Rename it the War Department. We are not going of to fight a "Defense" now are we? Mindset people.

2) Single parents. Thanks for your help. He is a severance check equal to six months. Buh-bye.

3) All the Family and Community stuff on Stateside bases. Redundant and frequently prices are cheaper for the Soldier and the quality higher off post. Overseas I get it, Stateside,NO.

4) The Marine Corps. I would remove it from the Department of the Navy and slot it under the Department of the Army. Make for a massive reduction in procurement efforts. Going to the Marines would be like going to the Airborne. A specialized assignment but still just an assignment. It would still be Corps sized, though reshaped on the Brigade Combat Team concept. The Navy can protect their ports and other facilities with Master at Arms or draw from their Shore Duty sailors.

5) The Airborne. Dead concept on Brigade and Division level. Consider the 21st century threat detection capability and Theater air defense missiles that could destroy not just damage cargo aircraft. Lets be real. The Brigade drop hasn't even been used in Afghanistan where such an effort could actually have achieved total surprise and seized terrain and taliban assets. With upcoming Laser technology anything rising above the horizon is dead upon detection. The chips are in the air on SOF units and air delivered supplies.

6) Close Air Support is an Army function and should be at the Brigade level. Possibly even with prop driven dirt strip capable air craft.

7) Army Bases should be in areas where there is room to train. Those Posts in the Eastern US or worse inside large cities would be closed even turned over to the Park Service. We know why there still there and tradition is bullshit. Their there to dazzle Congressmen and Senators on visits and to be close to the White House and the Pentagon.

8) Joint Bases. This would be the new normal. Where ever possible all installations would be multi-service. Keeps the operating costs and FORCES cooperative interoperability. Shut down post or installations could become housing for Veterans of all wars. It is not fancy but, it will be familiar, with people that understand or share experiences, and would coordinate care and services better.

9) Ditch the short and quick Non Commissioned Officer Courses. The Primary Leadership Development Course is the first induction into the NCO Corps. This course should be the damned hardest. Candidates should have to show a commitment like re-enlisting to get to into it. The Course should be at a minimum 12 months classified as a hardship tour without relocation of dependents. The Graduates should all be very proficient in Infantry Operations regardless of the MOS, be able to operate any weapon system, use any radio, and drive any vehicle that is not aircraft or watercraft greater than a RIB craft. The lectures and presentations given by students on facets of military history, tactics, strategy, and concepts of the operational art should graduate each student with an Associates degree in Military Science. If their Professional Soldiers than Professional training with formal classes and measured results should be standard.

10) Controversial idea. Reduce the carrier fleet and increase the Submarine fleet. More SLBMs afloat. The Carrier itself is beginning to be threaten by ballistic missiles (China is first here) with non nuclear warheads anywhere at sea in the missiles radius. Reduce the Navy Carriers to six with two at sea in the areas of most interest. Give two to the Coast Guard for humanitarian missions and disaster relief missions. CG aircraft carriers with Opreys and Helos would benefit missions on the scale of Katrina and the SE Asian Tsunami event.

more rants to follow.

[Legbreaker]

Some pretty sweeping changes there and I tend to agree with much of the idea behind it, if not the actual detail.
Might run into some issues with discrimiation with the single parents (although I understnd the rationale).
Renaming the department is likely to cause more problems than it solves in a democracy (ok, ok, it's technically a republic!). PR issues must be addressed.
Some military establishments are needed in built up areas, if only to act as recruiting stations, administration hubs, and so forth. Posting combat arms to them is however just plan STUPID unless they're there to support the recruiting efforts or whatever else is happening there.
I don't know much about the US NCO programs (bugger all to be honest) but 12 months seems somewhat excessive to train a junior NCO.
Certainly agree that the US has too many carriers for it's needs. Reallocating to the Coast Guard seems like a good idea, although it won't help the budget all that much given operating costs won't be greatly reduced. They'd still need to be protected when deployed outside US waters in case some other country takes the opportunity to sink one - a carrier, even if not officially in the navy, is still a carrier and can be used as such with a quick polish and rearming.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

So if I can wear the Crown for a day what would I do with the Dept of Defense.

1) Rename it the War Department. We are not going of to fight a "Defense" now are we? Mindset people.

There are arguements pro and con to this, in concept, I agree. We don't fight a defense. I'd keep it a combined department, i.e. no Navy Department etc.

2) Single parents. Thanks for your help. He is a severance check equal to six months. Buh-bye.

Harsh. But I do understand, there was nothing worse than deploying on a FTX or, even worse, a combat op and having a sizeable portion of your unit nondeployable because they are single parents or preggie. I don't know about outright kicking them out....perhaps converting them to recruiters or admin duties only. Certainly not in Combat or Combat Support units.

3) All the Family and Community stuff on Stateside bases. Redundant and frequently prices are cheaper for the Soldier and the quality higher off post. Overseas I get it, Stateside,NO.

Agreed!!! Just as an example, the Post Exchange was originally started to gve enlisted personnel a place to buy necessary goods cheap. Its now a warehouse where officers and retirees can buy name brands at cheap prices. EVERY enlisted member I know buys diapers at WalMart, better selection and better prices. But if you need that 72-inch Flat Screen for the den......

4) The Marine Corps. I would remove it from the Department of the Navy and slot it under the Department of the Army. Make for a massive reduction in procurement efforts. Going to the Marines would be like going to the Airborne. A specialized assignment but still just an assignment. It would still be Corps sized, though reshaped on the Brigade Combat Team concept. The Navy can protect their ports and other facilities with Master at Arms or draw from their Shore Duty sailors.

One can already hear the screams from the Navy and the Marines! Overall, you may be right, but I don't see this happening much before 5500AD!!!!! Now converting the Marine logistical support to the Army, and streamlining the Marines into BCT organizations, requiring joint field exercises may be a better way to go, not to mention cutting down on the screaming (noise reduction is good, AND you get to met OSHA guidlines).

5) The Airborne. Dead concept on Brigade and Division level. Consider the 21st century threat detection capability and Theater air defense missiles that could destroy not just damage cargo aircraft. Lets be real. The Brigade drop hasn't even been used in Afghanistan where such an effort could actually have achieved total surprise and seized terrain and taliban assets. With upcoming Laser technology anything rising above the horizon is dead upon detection. The chips are in the air on SOF units and air delivered supplies.

I can see the 82nd Airborne has a holding division with a variety of Battalion Combat Teams under its umbrella. But the chances of a Brigade or Division combat operation is roughly that of Angelina Jolie dumping Brad Pitt and moving in with me.

6) Close Air Support is an Army function and should be at the Brigade level. Possibly even with prop driven dirt strip capable air craft.

Can't agree with each Brigade getting its own CAS squadron, but CAS needs to be an Army function with the pilots required to serve with infantry/armor units before going on to flight school.

7) Army Bases should be in areas where there is room to train. Those Posts in the Eastern US or worse inside large cities would be closed even turned over to the Park Service. We know why there still there and tradition is bullshit. Their there to dazzle Congressmen and Senators on visits and to be close to the White House and the Pentagon.

Turn the ones near cities into admin posts, but Combat Arms needs maneuver room. Build them in areas away from the cities.

8) Joint Bases. This would be the new normal. Where ever possible all installations would be multi-service. Keeps the operating costs and FORCES cooperative interoperability. Shut down post or installations could become housing for Veterans of all wars. It is not fancy but, it will be familiar, with people that understand or share experiences, and would coordinate care and services better.

Agreed!

9) Ditch the short and quick Non Commissioned Officer Courses. The Primary Leadership Development Course is the first induction into the NCO Corps. This course should be the damned hardest. Candidates should have to show a commitment like re-enlisting to get to into it. The Course should be at a minimum 12 months classified as a hardship tour without relocation of dependents. The Graduates should all be very proficient in Infantry Operations regardless of the MOS, be able to operate any weapon system, use any radio, and drive any vehicle that is not aircraft or watercraft greater than a RIB craft. The lectures and presentations given by students on facets of military history, tactics, strategy, and concepts of the operational art should graduate each student with an Associates degree in Military Science. If their Professional Soldiers than Professional training with formal classes and measured results should be standard.

Nope. For the non-U.S. military members, when you enlist, you are Uncle Sam's for six years, you will hear a lot of BS about 2-year, 3-year and 4-year enlistments, its just a recruiting trick. You are in for six years, it may be 2 years active, but it will be 4-years Individual Ready Reserve...read the fine print!

That having been said, there needs to be changes in how the service recruits its NCOs. The Primary Leadership Development Course should be directed at those eligible for promotion to E-4 (E-1 to E-3 is automatic based on time in service). It should really be a Corporal selection process where those who graduate pick up Corporal and those who don't do not get to reenlist. It should be a 4 month course. After that, every level of NCO development should be proceeded by a 6 month course...and if you don't pass, you don't get the promotion!

10) Controversial idea. Reduce the carrier fleet and increase the Submarine fleet. More SLBMs afloat. The Carrier itself is beginning to be threaten by ballistic missiles (China is first here) with non nuclear warheads anywhere at sea in the missiles radius. Reduce the Navy Carriers to six with two at sea in the areas of most interest. Give two to the Coast Guard for humanitarian missions and disaster relief missions. CG aircraft carriers with Opreys and Helos would benefit missions on the scale of Katrina and the SE Asian Tsunami event.

Disagree and why an Army puke is defending the squids....).

We need a carrier air arm. Control of the sea lines of communications (SLOC) requires control of the air and sea, and we can't always post an air wing within range to cover potential problems. Enter the carriers, they provide a reasonable size air group and even more important, a US air base that does not depend on the good graces of a nearby country. We should maintain a carrier force of between 11 to 13 carriers. This normally allows one in the Atlantic and two in the Pacific on station, three more working up for deployment, three returning from deployment and 2-3 undergoing major overhauls.

Yes they face a more deadly threat, but given current technology, there is nothing that can replace a carrier. We need more submarines, both nuclear attack boats as well as coastal diesel-electric boats.

Decommissioning the USAF ICBM fleet would save many and increasing the Navie's SLBM force would make for a more effective (and safer) nuclear arsenal.

As fas as giving the Coast Guard carriers....there is no need, a couple of large merchant hulls can be converted into aviation support ships and used for disaster relief.

just a few peanuts from the gallery...

[Targan]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

But the chances of a Brigade or Division combat operation is roughly that of Angelina Jolie dumping Brad Pitt and moving in with me.

You can have her after she's finished being in a sweaty three-way with my wife and I.

[dragoon500ly]

I'm not really saying all of the Americans are like this, but from what I've come to see is that most of you don't really see what goes on beyond the borders of your own state and even far less, beyond the U.S. borders. Of course this is a bit of generalization, just like saying most of the Muslim countries are socially in the stone ages. They are culturally very different from the western world and yes, they treat their women poorly, if they get out of line, but then again, there are some Christian factions that are just as stone aged, if you ask me. It doesn't matter, what the religion is - fundamentalists are fundamentalists everywhere and they act pretty much the same everywhere, no matter what the religion is.

The reality is much harsher, most Americans are in the dark as to who their town's mayor and city councils are, let alone what they are doing. When you start adding in what the various states and even the federal governments are up too....most Americans would rather watch the various sitcoms and sports programs. Toss in what is going on over seas....I doubt that the vast majority of Americans can even pinpoint Iraq and Afghanistan on a map, let alone have any idea of what is going on. Toss in the religious nuts....I always have felt that the founding fathers shouldn't have stopped with the seperation of Church and State, they should have added that Chruches are forbidden to have anything to do with the State!

Case in point, that certain little church in Kansas that feels it is necessary to "attend" every military funeral so that they can scream their racist/sexist agenda and blame the service member's death on the government's failure to keep >INSERT MINORITY GROUP OF CHOICE< under control. I've always believed that the freedom of speech should be defended, even when you don't agree with what the other party is saying, but this group of lunatics is enough to make one doubt the validity of that argument.

Coupled to a complete failure to teach American History or Civics and I fear for the future.

As for the U.S. military diminishing it's power, I don't really see that generally as a bad thing. I can't say I'm anti-U.S., but I kind of frown to the way, you guys have driven your own agendas at gunpoint ever since the Iron Curtain came down. The appeasement policy the U.S. has towards Israel is something very disturbing - UN sanctions against Israel harassing people, who lived in the region before someone got the bright idea to actually erect a jewish colony there, can not be put in to action because the motions are vetoed by the U.S..

What the world would most definitely need is a bit broader point of view. And thus endeth the rant. No hard feelings, people. I know some very intelligent and nice Americans, who actually know where Finland is and have enough curiosity to get to know other cultures and societies.

The problem is that whatever political party that is in control of the government at the time, is made up of a collection of weak-minded dips**ts who answer to the various special intrest groups and whatever briefing points that their staffs draw up. This is perhaps the greatest weakness of the American system of government. Not the election of the most populat vs. the most qualified, but the willingness to allow any political action committee to have the degree of power that these special intrest groups have. They need to be banned or have their degree of access rigidly controlled...perhaps no more than 5 minutes per decade.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Targan

You can have her after she's finished being in a sweaty three-way with my wife and I.

So Solly! Once she gets a look at my handsome face......

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

...I've always believed that the freedom of speech should be defended, even when you don't agree with what the other party is saying, but this group of lunatics is enough to make one doubt the validity of that argument...

I too believe that people should have freedom of speech but I also believe it needs to be qualified with responsibility. That is to say, yes, you have freedom of speech but only so long as you take responsibility for what you say.
The church you mentioned is a case in point, they don't appear to care that the only people that hear their brand of BS are the families of the deceased. People that are going through a very emotional time, they certainly don't need some dickhead using the funeral as a flagpole upon which to hoist their agenda. I believe in such cases those church members should be held accountable for their actions.

[weswood]

Originally Posted by Medic

..... they treat their women poorly, if they get out of line, but then again, there are some Christian factions that are just as stone aged, if you ask me. It doesn't matter, what the religion is - fundamentalists are fundamentalists everywhere and they act pretty much the same everywhere, no matter what the religion is.

I agree with a lot of what you've said, but I have to ask what Christian fundamentalist sect kills a woman by stoning for having extramarital sex?

I really do agree with you but I keep hearing how Christians are no better than Muslims. Maybe at one time, over 200 years ago, we had the Inquisition and witch burning, but we're over it.

[weswood]

Once upon a time my father told me we- members of the U.S. military- have the duty to ensure citizens freedom of speech, even when they are protesting us (Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, Airmen). I believed that then, and still do.

I also think society would be a lot more polite as to what is said if duelling was legal. Pistols with one round, seconds, a judge, and televise the whole thing. People would have to really believe what they say and have to be willing to back it up.

And yes, I may be crazy, but I'm okay with it

[Targan]

Originally Posted by weswood

I agree with a lot of what you've said, but I have to ask what Christian fundamentalist sect kills a woman by stoning for having extramarital sex?

I really do agree with you but I keep hearing how Christians are no better than Muslims. Maybe at one time, over 200 years ago, we had the Inquisition and witch burning, but we're over it.

Abortion clinic doctors being gunned down on their doorsteps. Shootouts at isolated Christian sect compounds. Atheists like me look on in abject horror.

It's been going on for thousands of years and I doubt it will end any time soon - countless numbers of human beings slaughtering each other over, basically, whose fairy tale is the "correct" one. From where I'm standing it's just plain madness.

[Targan]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

So Solly! Once she gets a look at my handsome face......

Exactly! That's what I thought would seal the deal in my favor

[Legbreaker]

You're all wrong. Angelina is mine.
How can she turn down an Adonis like me?

[Targan]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

You're all wrong. Angelina is mine.
How can she turn down an Adonis like me?

Good question, but the fact remains, she's been doing just that for some time now.

[Webstral]

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

So if I can wear the Crown for a day what would I do with the Dept of Defense.

1) Rename it the War Department. We are not going of to fight a "Defense" now are we? Mindset people.

I’m fine with this. However, the original purpose behind having a Department of Defense was to provide greater continuity between conflicts. Inevitably, the public will ask why we’re paying for a Department of War when there is no Department of War. Defense is always good.

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

2) Single parents. Thanks for your help. He is a severance check equal to six months. Buh-bye.

I agree in principle, but there needs to be room for nuance, etc.

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

4) The Marine Corps. I would remove it from the Department of the Navy and slot it under the Department of the Army. Make for a massive reduction in procurement efforts. Going to the Marines would be like going to the Airborne. A specialized assignment but still just an assignment. It would still be Corps sized, though reshaped on the Brigade Combat Team concept. The Navy can protect their ports and other facilities with Master at Arms or draw from their Shore Duty sailors.

The Army would destroy the Corps within five years. There might still be troops wearing some sort of Marine identifier, but they’d lose what makes them Marines. As for procurement, the Marines spend their money more wisely than the Army. I strongly suspect that whatever gains we would make in further centralizing the procurement process would be lost when the Marines rose to the Army’s level of wastefulness.

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

5) The Airborne. Dead concept on Brigade and Division level. Consider the 21st century threat detection capability and Theater air defense missiles that could destroy not just damage cargo aircraft. Lets be real. The Brigade drop hasn't even been used in Afghanistan where such an effort could actually have achieved total surprise and seized terrain and taliban assets. With upcoming Laser technology anything rising above the horizon is dead upon detection. The chips are in the air on SOF units and air delivered supplies.

Reluctantly, I’m forced to agree. If some way could be found to preserve what makes the 82nd Airborne a special formation while doing away with the airborne division concept, I’d buy in.

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

6) Close Air Support is an Army function and should be at the Brigade level. Possibly even with prop driven dirt strip capable air craft.

I’ve heard the USAF burns heretics for less. Like Galileo, you may even have to wait centuries for not-quite-an-apology.

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

7) Army Bases should be in areas where there is room to train. Those Posts in the Eastern US or worse inside large cities would be closed even turned over to the Park Service. We know why there still there and tradition is bullshit. Their there to dazzle Congressmen and Senators on visits and to be close to the White House and the Pentagon.

I think Congressmen are less dazzled than self-interested. Base closure is a serious blow to the local economy. Some Congressmen survive a base closure in their districts. Others do not.

Realistically, the only way to make closures of smaller Army posts work is to align units of every type with the existing base structure. If you can’t have any heavy brigades in a state with insufficient maneuver space at its posts, then many states east of the Mississippi will lose what heavy units they have left in their National Guards. I’m okay with this, since I’ve already advocated that the combat units ought to go the active Army.

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

8) Joint Bases. This would be the new normal. Where ever possible all installations would be multi-service.

A good idea. Lots of politics will emerge as the services jockey for key leadership positions on the combined posts, though.

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

9) Ditch the short and quick Non Commissioned Officer Courses. The Primary Leadership Development Course is the first induction into the NCO Corps. This course should be the damned hardest. Candidates should have to show a commitment like re-enlisting to get to into it. The Course should be at a minimum 12 months classified as a hardship tour without relocation of dependents. The Graduates should all be very proficient in Infantry Operations regardless of the MOS, be able to operate any weapon system, use any radio, and drive any vehicle that is not aircraft or watercraft greater than a RIB craft. The lectures and presentations given by students on facets of military history, tactics, strategy, and concepts of the operational art should graduate each student with an Associates degree in Military Science. If their Professional Soldiers than Professional training with formal classes and measured results should be standard.

Another excellent idea. This one would require improving the pool of candidates, though. There would have to be a much higher throughput of junior enlisted folks through the forces to yield the required quality at the team leader level. Let’s face it: a lot of the junior enlisted folks are guys and gals who didn’t do well at school.

I do like the idea of a serious firebreak in the enlisted progression, though. In addition to my previous comments on improving pay and privileges for the infantry, I’d improve pay for E-5 and above. (I’d pay for it by getting rid of 40-50% of the general officers and 25-30% of the field grade officers.) That way, an enlistee can do his/her single enlistment, get the bennies, and feel good about serving his country. But the real carrot ought to lie just on the other side of selection for PLDC and promotion to E-5.

Originally Posted by ArmySGT.

10) Controversial idea. Reduce the carrier fleet and increase the Submarine fleet. More SLBMs afloat. The Carrier itself is beginning to be threaten by ballistic missiles (China is first here) with non nuclear warheads anywhere at sea in the missiles radius. Reduce the Navy Carriers to six with two at sea in the areas of most interest. Give two to the Coast Guard for humanitarian missions and disaster relief missions. CG aircraft carriers with Opreys and Helos would benefit missions on the scale of Katrina and the SE Asian Tsunami event. more rants to follow.

That is a controversial idea.

[weswood]

Originally Posted by Targan

Abortion clinic doctors being gunned down on their doorsteps. Shootouts at isolated Christian sect compounds. Atheists like me look on in abject horror.

It's been going on for thousands of years and I doubt it will end any time soon - countless numbers of human beings slaughtering each other over, basically, whose fairy tale is the "correct" one. From where I'm standing it's just plain madness.

Ya got me there, I forgot about those lunatics.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

You're all wrong. Angelina is mine.
How can she turn down an Adonis like me?

Our friends from down under need to face reality...with me she gets a handsome face, a body like a Greek God, access to a knife collection larger than her own...not to mention the never to be forgotten thrill of dallying with a real live cavalryman!!!!

How can you compare to that combination?

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

Our friends from down under need to face reality...with me she gets a handsome face, a body like a Greek God, access to a knife collection larger than her own...not to mention the never to be forgotten thrill of dallying with a real live cavalryman!!!!

How can you compare to that combination?

Not to mention the imagination of Leonardo da Vinci!

[Sanjuro]

a body like a Greek God

Would that be Dionysus?

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

...not to mention the never to be forgotten thrill of dallying with a real live cavalryman!!!!

Cavalryman - there's your problem right there!
Having to deal with that just once would be enough to turn a strong stomach, just seriously considering a repeat would destroy sanity!