Our current military readiness

We have ten carrier groups when Russia has one and china has one (barely). We spend more than the next ten countries combined on our military. You want an honest debate....then show up with some facts.

 

Now to return to the actual topic at hand.

The biggest problem with our military today is primarily the last two and a half decades of deferred maintenance and upgrades. And our military is not quite as impressive as many people seem to think.

Numbers wise, we have the 3rd largest in the world (behind India and ahead of North Korea) counting only Active Duty forces. Add in the Reserves, and we rank 7th (behind Russia and ahead of Brazil).

However, to be fair Russia actually ranks even higher, since they have a mandatory 1 year Conscription they have a much larger pool of individuals who could be called back into service who are already trained.

Then you have equipment. By tanks, the US ranks 3rd (behind China, ahead of India). Aircraft we are second (behind China, ahead of Russia), and also second in nuclear weapons (behind Russia, ahead of China).

And much of our equipment is poorly maintained because of the deferred maintenance, it is nearing or actually past it's designed lifespan. Most of our military is still coasting by on the Reagan era build-up, and it is showing it's age.

Not that many years ago we were joking that the sons of B-52 aircrews were now manning their father's aircraft. Well, now the grandsons of those aircrews are manning them. People do not seem to realize how huge segments of our military have become antiquated.

Our newest bomber is 18 years old. Our newest cruiser is 23 years old. Most of our fighters date back to the post-Vietnam era. Most of our transport helicopters also date to the Vietnam era. Go into any motor pool and you will see HMMWVs dating to the mid 1980's.

And of all the PATRIOT missile launchers I worked on, only 1 of them dated to 1990. The majority were built from 1982-1986.

In short, we have returned to the problem we faced many times in the past. Where the majority of those entering the military today are working on equipment older than they are. It was the running joke (but true) when I was in PATRIOT that I was the only crewman who was older than the launchers he or she served.

And the state of readiness of that equipment is horrible. It is not unusual to find units that are 50% or lower of operational readiness because their equipment has or is about to fall apart. In the era of frozen budgets and spending being mandated to certain things, repairs have taken a backseat along with training and operations. Without working equipment and actual in the field training, it is impossible to keep our forces trained and equipped if they are needed.

And even worse, the planed replacements for much of our equipment is either not even being designed at all, or are pretty much on a permanent freeze.

 

This is total nonsense. We have the most advanced equipment and forces in the world. It is way overkill. We could cut it all in half and be able to defend our shores with no problem

 

Good for you, want a cookie?

BTW, 15 years active here, 6+ now in the Reserves. And yea, I was in during the First Gulf War as well, 0311. And have also served in the newest one. Am on my 3rd official MOS at this time (0311, 14T, 25B), and preparing to swear in for my 6th time (the first being during the first Reagan Administration). So forgive me if that does not impress me much. 10 years as a grunt, multiple deployments through the decades, been there done that.

And yes, an honest thanks for your having served also.

But I said "cry of the coward", and I did mean that (I never said that you were, do not personalize things). Isolationists, "peace at any cost" pacifists, "let somebody else do it", those kinds of people are generally cowards more often than not. Do not care about anybody or anything other than themselves or how things affect them.

Myself, I take a much different view of life and humanity. And if you bother to read my tagline and research a bit more into who Mr. Mill was, you might understand how I view things a bit more. It is amazing how much of my own personal beliefs fall in line with that of a philosopher who died almost 100 years before I was born, and did not even read about until relatively late in my life. 2004 in fact, when I picked up an Alternate history novel in which he was a main voice of reason and advisor in the series.

 

I would prefer to keep my fellow service members alive. They do not need to be fighting to increase corporate profits. Bring them home, close 75% of our overseas bases, cut our carrier groups in half and we will be safer and keep our soldiers alive at half the price

 

But would we be able to protect trade routes and fulfill alliances? Short answer: No, we wouldn't.

As stated before, I fully support our allies acting like allies and building up their militaries so we can downsize ours. However, it's foolish to just withdraw and leave a power vacuum.

 

That is not our job alone. They will never build up until they have to

 

Sorry, your belief in our equipment is almost arrogant.

The M1 is rapidly becoming obsolete in a modern battlefield. The T90 is equally on par with the M1, and many believe that the T-14 may be superior in many areas.

This year the MiG-35 will start it's initial production of 70 aircraft for Russia and Egypt. I would not be surprised if by 2020 2 or 3 more countries start to buy this new fighter, which is most ways is better than the F-16.

Their A-135 is superior to anything we have had since the mid 1970's, and the A-235 (in development) is expected to be even better.

And the US barely has an equal to the S-400 in it's barely fielded THAAD system. And nothing on the drawing board to even compete with the S-500 if it becomes operational.

Well, I can go on, but what is the point? I can list 20 individual examples, and you will simply ignore it. Like you have all others, and likely will do again. You will simply ignore anything that does not agree with your mindset and dismiss it in a few sentences.

 

If our job is to defend our shores we need a fraction of what we have and we can upgrade it all. The real savings come in from closing overseas bases and cutting the navy.

 

Correct and agreed. OTOH, leaving a power vaccuum by simply pulling out and cutting our military in half is a sure path to war.

Si vis pacem, para bellum

 

And we can defend against any country that attacks US.

 

I seem to have heard claims like that in the past. Like in the early 1920's after the War to End All Wars. Isolationism, cut the military and stop buying new equipment.

We all saw how well that worked. That is why our most advanced tank at the start of WWII were the Marmon-Herrington light tanks. Hundreds of them were built for export to China, but never delivered due to the outbreak of war. A tank so bad even the Poles rejected it (I guess they preferred hoses to that abortion).

Oh, by the time the US got into the war, at least they developed the M2. Funny, but US tanks in general sucked during the war, mostly due to the lack of effort put into development between the wars.

Yea, keep everybody safe and warm, snug in their little blankets back home. And we all know the results of the last time that happened. Almost half a million dead from the US alone, and over 600,000 wounded.

 

Well that's not what I said. I said upgrade all our equipment. The savings come from closing overseas military bases and reducing the navy. Do you know what a CBG costs to run?

 

Great quote by the way, right along side with "Trust, but verify".

A great many people also tend to ignore the fact that a lot of people who are Americans do not live in the "Lower 48", which is all most ever think about.

There are over 4 million US Citizens that most in this country tend to ignore. The people of Puerto Rico, Samoa, Guam, Saipan, Virgin Islands, and others. All Americans as much as everybody else in this country, but ignored by most.

And at least one of which has been directly threatened by one nation in that area of the world.

Then there are the COFA states, which include Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau.

And one also can not forget our treaties with Japan. We guaranteed that we would defend them (which they pay for), in exchange for dismantling most of their military and keeping only a self-defense force. Because it is guaranteed that if we pull out of there, they will start a massive re-armament program to offset the forces of China and North Korea. Which will then start each of those and other nations to building up even more.

A situation almost identical to what started WWII. Most tend to forget that it was Japan tearing up the Washington Naval Treaty and walking out of the League of Nations that ultimately led to the US involvement in WWII.

 

We have over 90 bases overseas. How many do you think China and Russia have?

 

Less than what for example the UK had to spend to throw together a task force to take back the Falkland's after it was invaded.

Now imagine our having to do that to take back Guam. Funny how people are ignorant that those living on islands way out in the West Pacific are American Citizens. As deserving of our protection as those living in Nebraska.

So I can only assume when you say "on our shores", you must only mean those in the Lower 48.

 

We could have five CBG's and have 5 times what any enemy could throw at us. Maybe we need 20 CBG's. Maybe 30. How much is too much?

 

"Whataboutism (also known as whataboutery) is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument, which is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda."

 

That's nice. And not relevant

 

Once again, a 2 sentence reply that addresses nothing.

Ask me if I care. Do I care? Not one single little bit.

But Russia does have around 20 overseas bases, with around 50,000 personnel deployed to them at any one time. And like the US, they maintain small cantonments and military advisor forces in dozens of other nations.

They used to have around 50 bases, until the relations with Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Uzbekistan soured to the point they were sent packing.

 

Then let's reduce ours. You are making my point.

And if you can't handle the debate you can leave at any time. Ate least I have not implied you are a coward

 

Actually, it is very relevant. You simply do not like what it means.

have you ever asked yourself why Russia is involved in the Syrian Civil War?

Well, it is obvious when you think about it.

Their largest Naval Base in the Mediterranean is the Tartus Naval Base, in Syria. In fact, last January the two nations signed a new treaty that will give Russia the base for another 50 years. And also gives them the right to expand it from the current replenishment and repair station, to make it a permanent home port for 11 ships once expansion is complete.

Also you have the Khmeimem Air Base, also on a new 50 year lease. The actual active involvement of the Russians in that war was when this base came under attack by rebels in 2015.

Over the last 2 years, the Khmeimem base has seen major expansion. Originally a training base for the Syrian Air Force, it is now an exclusive Russian Air Force Base. The runways can now handle any aircraft in the Russian fleet, and is now home to T90 tanks, BTRs, the S-400 air defense system, and at least 4 wings of fighters.

 

Thats nice. I don't care (sound familiar). They will never attack us from Syria. Let Europe handle it

 

Look, if you want to have a discussion, fine. I can do that. I also never called you a coward, I said it was the coward's way of thinking.

And to be honest, I am frankly bored of these constant 1-2 sentence responses that ignores anything stated. Sorry, this is nothing but the appearance of a 40 year old Monty Python skit.

No, do not even bother to respond unless you are going to state something of importance. Simply going "you are wrong I am right" is rather boring after it has been done 30 times with nothing to back it up.

Good day.

 

I'm not saying you are an idiot or a moron, but you have idiotic and moronic responses. There. Is that better.

Why do we even care about Syria? It has nothing to do with us. We are not the worlds policeman. Time for Europe to step up and defend themselves. There is never enough military spending for some. Congress pushes to build more tanks that even the army does not want. Enough is enough.

You have nothing to contribute.