Pentagon Plans to Shrink Army to Pre-World War II Level

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama has his Food Stamp Army

 

[RoadVirus]

Hagel (under Obama's orders) doesn't want to just cut it, he wants to GUT it!

The Statists haven't learned a damned thing from history. What has happened every time we have cut back forces? WE are always left with our pants down around our ankles when the shit hits the fan. Hagel is playing a dangerous game...AGAIN.

B.S.
Are you seriously trying to argue that the U.S. military is not bloated by the same waste and corruption that infects every other government department?

This is EXACTLY why we will never get any serious spending cuts. People whine for cuts and then whine when cuts are proposed.

Cutting the military is fine, but do it right! Don't go hacking away like a machete-wielding psychopath.

 

[Samson]

Evidently the Obama Administration Has Not Learned From History

A weak military sends a signal that emboldens our enemies as well as telling our allies we won't be able help them.
A strong Standing Military sends a strong message to the World.

When ever we have reduced the size our Armed Forces, we have had to hurriedly build it up again.

Yeah I get it, "Weak = BAAaaAAD; Strong = GOOooOOD"

More is Better.

The World is Simple.

Interesting though, that the US has always been able to muster and defeat its enemies, despite having a "reduced-sized Armed Forces." Based on this perspective, Learning From History, then we should continue to deflate military strength until it is absolutely necessary.

 

[nodoginnafight]

The Statists haven't learned a damned thing from history. What has happened every time we have cut back forces? WE are always left with our pants down around our ankles when the shit hits the fan. Hagel is playing a dangerous game...AGAIN.

B.S.
Are you seriously trying to argue that the U.S. military is not bloated by the same waste and corruption that infects every other government department?

This is EXACTLY why we will never get any serious spending cuts. People whine for cuts and then whine when cuts are proposed.

Cutting the military is fine, but do it right! Don't go hacking away like a machete-wielding psychopath.

I can live with this.
There is some common ground to be found among the vast majority of us. Let's not let the hyper-partisan zealots knock us off course.

 

[RoadVirus]

Hagel has a major uphill battle. He's talking about closing bases, cutting troop numbers, retiring the A-10, etc.

The A-10 has at least 2 more decades of service left in it and works with no problem. But he wants to keep the budget blackhole that is the F-35 program. Makes no sense.

 

[RoadVirus]

We don't need armed forces.

Everybody in the world loves us.

It's been that way since January, 2009.

Hasn't it?

This mistake, maybe more than all the other ill-considered things obama has done to our country, may in the end prove the most disastrous.

Obama wants us weak. He’s already accomplished that socially and economically. Now he’s turning his sights to doing it militarily.

 

[RoadVirus]

With a budget pushing close to a trillion dollars per year, the US military is the most advanced, most destructive fighting force in history. And some guys in caves have fought us to a standstill..

That's because the Dickhead in Chief tied the hands of our military with pansyass ROE.

 

[JWBooth]

It goes beyond incompetence. Some random quotes;

"Late last year Time’s Battlefield blog commented, “The Navy’s new Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) is not only staggeringly overpriced and chronically unreliable but — even if it were to work perfectly — cannot match the combat power of similar sized foreign warships costing only a fraction as much.”

"Gilmore’s new report stands by the 2011 assessment, though it sands down the rough edges. “LCS is not expected to be survivable,” it finds, “in that it is not expected to maintain mission capability after taking a significant hit in a hostile combat environment.” Additionally, Gilmore discloses that the Navy has “knowledge gaps related to the vulnerability of an aluminum ship structure to weapon-induced blast and fire damage,” but that it won’t conduct tests for those vulnerabilities until later this year or next year."

"the Navy will be deploying the USS Freedom before knowing if the so-called Littoral Combat Ship can survive, um, combat. And what the Navy does know about the ship isn’t encouraging: Among other problems, its guns don’t work right"

".If the LCS in its maximum configuration ran into even a Skjold-class patrol boat in the littorals or open sea it wouldn't stand a snowballs chance in Hades".

Don't the sailors deserve better from Navy planners? The more I look into this the more maddening it becomes. Talk about "bureaucratic" boondoggles. Yet the Navy seems resigned to redefining the platforms mission to match its capabilities. This defies all design-build logic, stands it on it's head actually.

"Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert cited the Littoral Combat Ship... as (a) critical new ship program... essential to the service’s future surface warfare strategy.

“We’ve got to integrate and embrace these new ships that are coming in and make them work and make them part of the scheme of the equation,”

Fuck.

The six ship Pegasus program made more sense for this purpose.

 

[zed42]

What is sad is that there are those that fail to remember history are doomed to repeat the mistakes. What some of you fail to realize is that the plan is not to just reduce the manning level of the military, but it is more than that. The following is copied from: not allowed to post link yet. However I copied the below from a Breibart article titled Hagel's Deep Cuts for Military Announced.

The cuts are expected to include the removal of the entire fleet of Air Force A-10 attack jets, reduce the U.S. Army from 490,000 troops to between 440,000 to 450,000, impose a one-year freeze on the salaries of general and flag officers; limit the increase of basic pay for military personnel to 1 percent, retard the growth of tax-free housing allowances for military personnel, and reduce the $1.4 billion direct subsidy which is given to military commissaries in order to lower the prices for soldiers. Eleven navy cruisers will be sent into reduced operating status. Some military retirees will see an increase in health insurance deductibles and co-pays.

Those that would consider making the military a career look at this as a direct threat. If the careerist, the backbone of the military, perceives this as an indication of future actions aimed at them and their families and walk it will have major consequences on the readiness and effectiveness of the military. Placing ships in reduced operating status puts a heavier burden on the remaining men and equipment, and slashes the training that would be lost. This action sounds small, but nothing says that the cuts will not continue. Obama has 2 more years and nothing says that his replacement sees the military in the same light. I would suggest that those that see no problem with reducing the military take a very very close look at the policies just after WWII and the horrendous impact on the military when the Korean War started.

 

[RandallFlagg]

B.S.
Are you seriously trying to argue that the U.S. military is not bloated by the same waste and corruption that infects every other government department?

Yet, interestingly enough, you left wingers never chant for cuts in other government departments.

Now, why don't you give us some areas other than military that should/could be cut that would not threaten the democratic voting base, considering this is a very important election year.

You do not think they are appeasing their voting base?


Does any liberal have any ounce of an ability to think for themselves?

Nope. They do not. Spending on entitlements has risen (and will continue to rise) dramatically. Hagel will cut the military and Papa Doc Obama will take that money and give it to the lay a bouts. It really IS that simple. A nation of slaves.

The "fundamental transformation" will be complete.

 

[The T]

The Statists haven't learned a damned thing from history. What has happened every time we have cut back forces? WE are always left with our pants down around our ankles when the shit hits the fan. Hagel is playing a dangerous game...AGAIN.

B.S.
Are you seriously trying to argue that the U.S. military is not bloated by the same waste and corruption that infects every other government department?

This is EXACTLY why we will never get any serious spending cuts. People whine for cuts and then whine when cuts are proposed.

Cutting the military is fine, but do it right! Don't go hacking away like a machete-wielding psychopath.

You make damned sure you can handle almost ANY contingency that might arise, and continually train to meet them all. Again? Hagel and Obama are playing a very dangerous game with the fate of this Republic and the people.

 

[The T]

Hagel (under Obama's orders) doesn't want to just cut it, he wants to GUT it!

The Statists haven't learned a damned thing from history. What has happened every time we have cut back forces? WE are always left with our pants down around our ankles when the shit hits the fan. Hagel is playing a dangerous game...AGAIN.

B.S.
Are you seriously trying to argue that the U.S. military is not bloated by the same waste and corruption that infects every other government department?

This is EXACTLY why we will never get any serious spending cuts. People whine for cuts and then whine when cuts are proposed.

Defense contractors get MORE budgeted than they ask for. Pensions for grunts get cut. WHY? Because defense contractors kickback a hefty part of what they get into campaign contributions.

But you all just keep on frothing and foaming your hyper-partisan rhetoric - you virtually guarantee that nothing meaningful will EVER happen. I am disgusted by the ignorance of the hyper-partisans. When the U.S. goes belly up - we will all have YOU to thank.

You watchdog what you're spending...is there fraud waste abuse? SURE, However...but from what I read? This is being done willy-nilly when there are other areas of the Government that could stand MORE watchdogging like DOMESTIC programs that overlap and copy that of other programs.

And stow that hyper-partisan shit boy, I don't belong to ANY party.

 

[Pheonixops]

We don't need armed forces.

Everybody in the world loves us.

It's been that way since January, 2009.

Hasn't it?

Do you know what the plan entails and the time frame in which it is supposed to be executed?

 

[Antares]

None of this is "Hagel's" plan, he isn't intelligent enough to put two sentences together.
This is all Obama

 

[Interpol]

America spends more on defense (offense, really) than the next 13 countries combined.

The Pentagon's plan was to reduce active-duty military from a wartime peak of 570,000 to 490,000 anyway; the new proposal is to bring it down to between 440-450k.

Seems logical to me. The last 12 years have proven that it isn't how much might we exercise, but how intelligently we do so. The last decade has also proven that our technology affords us the capability of making these sensible cuts.

What's galling is how the neo-cons and their supporters are actually calling for more spending. Always more spending. They're an insult to our collective intelligence, which says we should probably no longer have 150,000 troops scattered still between Germany, the Koreas and Japan. The Cold War is over. We're retaining bases all across the world and will still be able to be the world's police.

The military budget is at $711 billion. Surely we can bring it back down to pre-9/11 levels of about $525 billion. The savings would make up about a third of our current deficit, which has shrunk 4 years in a row.

 

[The T]

None of this is "Hagel's" plan, he isn't intelligent enough to put two sentences together.
This is all Obama

True...and Obama thought he was smart by nominating a Statist Repubican...Hagel is all too happy to carry it out.

 

[Antares]

None of this is "Hagel's" plan, he isn't intelligent enough to put two sentences together.
This is all Obama

True...and Obama thought he was smart by nominating a Statist Repubican...Hagel is all too happy to carry it out.

Yup, I am in Nebraska...he bailed just before we threw him out.

 

[Plasmaball]

the dismantlement of the military back to the point where we could not respond to a major conflict is smart, brilliant even, since it's clear that that idea is horrible beyond reason, but the idea of making us vulnerable is the clear intention.

Which conflict would you have us prepare for?

a possible large scale world war

The oceans are no longer barriers, we should be prepared at all times, rather than, once again, play catch up.

11 carriers isnt enough, besides the point they are not reducing fleet size.Man you guys mus hate Rumsfeld who wanted a lighter faster military.

 

[Plasmaball]

are you pulling my chain or do you really not know?

Actually, I don't

Who are the bad guys and why are we going to fight them?

Global Firepower - 2014 World Military Strength Ranking

USA, active duty 1.4 mill
reserves 851k
Russia, active duty 766k
reserves 2.5 mill
China, active duty 2.3 mill
reserves 2.3 mill


If you think that neither of those countries would never war with us, you're as gullible as the people pre-WW2.

lol.....ohes noes..3rd rate armies for the fail.

 

[eagle1462010]

Aluminum Armor

Aluminum is much lighter than steel and relatively strong. Since it doesn't rust, it seems like the ideal metal for ships. However, no one uses aluminum for fighting ships because it can catch fire when hit, which produces intense heat that cannot be extinguished with water orHMS Sheffield regular fire extinguishers. In fact, aluminum is so volatile that powdered aluminum is a prime component in rocket fuel. The US Air Force 15,000 BLU-82B bomb contains 12,600 pounds of low-cost GSX slurry (ammonium nitrate, aluminum powder, and polystyrene). The British built a few frigates with aluminum in the 1970s. During the Falklands war, one of these ships, the HMS Sheffield, was hit by a single Exocet anti-ship missile. The damage was not fatal since the missile failed to explode, but its rocket fuel torched the Sheffield's aluminum hull, which ignited and burned until it sank. In contrast, the steel hull frigate USS Stark was hit by two Iraqi Exocet missiles in 1988 and survived.

Another disadvantage is that aluminum is less resistant to damage. A heavy machine gun round, rocket, or land mine striking a steel hull makes a small hole. However, cast aluminum shatters like plate glass. Hits cause large holes as hundreds of aluminum fragments blast forward causing casualties.

The US Army learned this when it tested early versions of the aluminum Bradley infantry fighting vehicle. In the Bradley tests, small RPG explosions caused only minor damage, but ignited the aluminum body and caused most vehicles to literally burn to the ground. Even worse, burning aluminum produces deadly fumes which instantly kill anyone inside. Only after heavy criticism and actual live-fire tests did changes occur. (see "The Pentagon Wars", by J. Burton, pp. 136-193) A steel armor coat was added and "spall liners" were installed inside to catch fragments. The latest model of the Bradley has an all-steel body.

This is what we refer to as a Class Delta Fire. Aluminum's ignition temperature is much much lower than steel. Once metal burns it is self sustaining and it CANNOT BE PUT OUT. It must be cut out and thrown over.

While some reports the aluminum fires on the HMS Sheffield disclaim the data on aluminum stating the superstructure was of steel, they later went away from aluminum in their Navy.

Aluminum has too many problems. I'm now stating another problem and that is specifically low ignition temps causing a Class Delta Fire. Once that occurs you are done.

As stated in the above article, the Stark took 2 hits and survived...