RE: http://www.military.com/forums/0,15240,181806,00.html

Wow, are we talking about change, or going back to the gool old days of the Clinton Era, where the Military was basically stripped of their materials and tools needed to complete the mission of DEFENDING the Country?

Why not just go back to horse back and stone throwing slings??? Heck, who needs a horse?

Look, I understand that the US Gov't spends a lot of money on defense contracts. I also understand that the Gov't WASTES a ton of money on unessary crap. But let's not lose sight of the mission and changing times.

Again, we need to get on the phones and call our friends and family and have them call their
Congressmen and Senators and remind them who they work for. They need to understand what is going on.

quote:

Why not just go back to horse back and stone throwing slings???

Actually horse cavalry would be quite effective for movement in places like Afghanistan.

I wouldn't suggest bringing back medium (Hussar, Lancer) or heavy (Curriaser) horse units but light horse (Dragoon) mounted Infantry would be most effective.

Seriously, I do see your point.

quote:

Originally posted by sgtjmackinjersey:
RE: http://www.military.com/forums/0,15240,181806,00.html

Wow, are we talking about change, or going back to the gool old days of the Clinton Era, where the Military was basically stripped of their materials and tools needed to complete the mission of DEFENDING the Country?

Why not just go back to horse back and stone throwing slings??? Heck, who needs a horse?

Look, I understand that the US Gov't spends a lot of money on defense contracts. I also understand that the Gov't WASTES a ton of money on unessary crap. But let's not lose sight of the mission and changing times.

Again, we need to get on the phones and call our friends and family and have them call their
Congressmen and Senators and remind them who they work for. They need to understand what is going on.

Not sure where you were at, but there was never a shortage of training funds in 3D MarDiv.

The level of Federal Spending on everything has not been sustainable for years. The bailout is now estimated by some to have a total liftime cost of $7.4 Trillion including interest on the national debt. That is even before Obomber takes office. I expect that Military spending will not be spared in the short term. When the dust settles over who and what gets cut, yes I agree we are going to have to deal with a Clinton era type of lowered expectations. Tighten your seat belt, rough ride ahead.

Even though I am a DA employee, I sincerely hope Obama DOES pull the DoD's credit card, and here's why!
High tech DoD spending has become a "Bailout" for tactical incompetance.
Consider, During the last two world wars, we saw technology pound the battlefield- Within fifty years, for instance, the Sopwith bi-plane became the ME 262 turbine jet fighter-WoW!
However, the turbine engine had been around since the end of the 19th Centruy.
Point is, there isn't much "new" technology to develop or exploit. We're in an era of diminsihing returns for R&D funds spent on enhanced capability. We might rather go back to the fundamentals of our strategic and tactical doctrine and see if can't use what we already got a little more intelligently. BottomLine: nobody can afford a fleet of ampbibious assault at $10 million a copy. Especially, if we intend to send these vehicles across waters that battleships fear? Ridicuous!! Same for the Osprey!! Get you r basic grunt tactics together and either go in for keeps or don't do it all, and stop this high tech, long ragne dithering around.

In regards to Shuman 14 about "calvary", Gen Blackjack Pershing 1917 persued the Mexican rebel Pancho Villa thru the Sierra Madre Mountains of Mexico for over a year & failed. Seems the American horses were just like their riders, which required 3 squares a day (expensive feed) whereas the Mexican horses like the 'rebels" were use to living off the terrain. Hmm pretty much like the insurgents in Afghanistan?

The Marines have to prove this thing works. Wat about LCAC's bringing Abrams tanks and LAV's to shore? Is storming the beach history? Wat about the Osprey and using CH-46's? Does the vehicle work, as advertised?

I've been told the new Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV's) are having tons of bugs to work out. Then again, so did the M1A1 Abrams.



Don
Proud father of a US Marine, AAV Mech

quote:

Originally posted by sgtjmackinjersey:
RE: http://www.military.com/forums/0,15240,181806,00.html

Wow, are we talking about change, or going back to the gool old days of the Clinton Era, where the Military was basically stripped of their materials and tools needed to complete the mission of DEFENDING the Country?

Why not just go back to horse back and stone throwing slings??? Heck, who needs a horse?

Look, I understand that the US Gov't spends a lot of money on defense contracts. I also understand that the Gov't WASTES a ton of money on unessary crap. But let's not lose sight of the mission and changing times.

Again, we need to get on the phones and call our friends and family and have them call their
Congressmen and Senators and remind them who they work for. They need to understand what is going on.

I know exactly where you're ocming from. Two of the ten U S Army divisions could not be deployed for the lack of readiness. Funny how people forget and try to hide these things. Even to the extent some undersecretary wanted to change the Marine uniform because it looked too "masculine" the administrations hatred for all things military was apparent. Al Gore spoke up and said no matter, we're still the best trained. But that didn't fly either, you can't train without equipment and guys in the field without ammo. Bang, bang, just doesn't get it. Including those that policed Serbia.

Maybe Ford or GM should build them for free. I think they have a Big Bill to pay off to the Taxpayer. And no way should they have a price tag like that. Let's get on the KISS System.

Semper Fi

Why would this surprise anybody. We all know the Scummander in Chief would cut and slash so he could appease his base. Of course new programs have bugs, it's part and parcel of being new. I rather suspect the first rock thrown had it's share of dificulties. We need these new systems, so get off the dime and implement them.
SEMPER FROG!

quote:

Originally posted by rayevinsonsr:

quote:

Originally posted by sgtjmackinjersey:
RE: http://www.military.com/forums/0,15240,181806,00.html

Wow, are we talking about change, or going back to the gool old days of the Clinton Era, where the Military was basically stripped of their materials and tools needed to complete the mission of DEFENDING the Country?

Why not just go back to horse back and stone throwing slings??? Heck, who needs a horse?

Look, I understand that the US Gov't spends a lot of money on defense contracts. I also understand that the Gov't WASTES a ton of money on unessary crap. But let's not lose sight of the mission and changing times.

Again, we need to get on the phones and call our friends and family and have them call their
Congressmen and Senators and remind them who they work for. They need to understand what is going on.

I know exactly where you're ocming from. Two of the ten U S Army divisions could not be deployed for the lack of readiness. Funny how people forget and try to hide these things. Even to the extent some undersecretary wanted to change the Marine uniform because it looked too "masculine" the administrations hatred for all things military was apparent. Al Gore spoke up and said no matter, we're still the best trained. But that didn't fly either, you can't train without equipment and guys in the field without ammo. Bang, bang, just doesn't get it. Including those that policed Serbia.

Both Bushes cut the military budget.

quote:

Originally posted by Jeannot23:

quote:

Originally posted by rayevinsonsr:

quote:

Originally posted by sgtjmackinjersey:
RE: http://www.military.com/forums/0,15240,181806,00.html

Wow, are we talking about change, or going back to the gool old days of the Clinton Era, where the Military was basically stripped of their materials and tools needed to complete the mission of DEFENDING the Country?

Why not just go back to horse back and stone throwing slings??? Heck, who needs a horse?

Look, I understand that the US Gov't spends a lot of money on defense contracts. I also understand that the Gov't WASTES a ton of money on unessary crap. But let's not lose sight of the mission and changing times.

Again, we need to get on the phones and call our friends and family and have them call their
Congressmen and Senators and remind them who they work for. They need to understand what is going on.

I know exactly where you're ocming from. Two of the ten U S Army divisions could not be deployed for the lack of readiness. Funny how people forget and try to hide these things. Even to the extent some undersecretary wanted to change the Marine uniform because it looked too "masculine" the administrations hatred for all things military was apparent. Al Gore spoke up and said no matter, we're still the best trained. But that didn't fly either, you can't train without equipment and guys in the field without ammo. Bang, bang, just doesn't get it. Including those that policed Serbia.

Both Bushes cut the military budget.

You're half right. The budget hasn't seen a cut by this President or the Congress since being in office and 911. In fact the Congress has voted for additional manpower during this last administration, something we haven't seen since Ron Reagan was in charge. The "Peace Dividend: handed to us by the end of the cold war was a natural phenomenon. So Papa Bush initiated the "Peace Dividend" and Clinton continue it. But that's not what I was discussing. Be prepared with what you've got. Secretary Cohen struggle through the explanation during a down time for the military. Congress was calling for resignations. One General called it a hollow military much like a boy scout camp, General Shinseki began a transition to look more like the Marine corp. I don't care if you got 10 or 20 division as long as they have the equipment and training. Same as the Navy, went from 600 ships to less half. The manpower may be less but remember your first paycheck. Mine was $19.90. So the military grew smaller, but with more toys that go boom where and when you need them. And a damn sight more professional.

Wow...two decades of research, it still won't be fielded until 2020 and they still have to "work out the bugs" once it is fielded? The technology will be out of date by the time its fielded. Are we a bunch of suckers or what?

quote:

Originally posted by 10990572:
Even though I am a DA employee, I sincerely hope Obama DOES pull the DoD's credit card, and here's why!
High tech DoD spending has become a "Bailout" for tactical incompetance.
Consider, During the last two world wars, we saw technology pound the battlefield- Within fifty years, for instance, the Sopwith bi-plane became the ME 262 turbine jet fighter-WoW!
However, the turbine engine had been around since the end of the 19th Centruy.
Point is, there isn't much "new" technology to develop or exploit. We're in an era of diminsihing returns for R&D funds spent on enhanced capability. We might rather go back to the fundamentals of our strategic and tactical doctrine and see if can't use what we already got a little more intelligently. BottomLine: nobody can afford a fleet of ampbibious assault at $10 million a copy. Especially, if we intend to send these vehicles across waters that battleships fear? Ridicuous!! Same for the Osprey!! Get you r basic grunt tactics together and either go in for keeps or don't do it all, and stop this high tech, long ragne dithering around.

THE TURBINE ENGINE HAD BEEN AROUND SINCE THE LATE 19TH CENTURY?!...
Man, don't tell Frank Whittle!...
LOL Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

Originally posted by johnevan:
The level of Federal Spending on everything has not been sustainable for years. The bailout is now estimated by some to have a total liftime cost of $7.4 Trillion including interest on the national debt. That is even before Obomber takes office. I expect that Military spending will not be spared in the short term. When the dust settles over who and what gets cut, yes I agree we are going to have to deal with a Clinton era type of lowered expectations. Tighten your seat belt, rough ride ahead.

So, I guess we should do what they did in the 1930s...
Put butcher paper signs on the side of trucks that said "TANK" and give the troops wooden guns and wooden mortars and mortar rounds made from empty tin cans...
We should then also do what they did to the graduating classes at the service academies, send them home, furloughed, no pay and no recall dates and tell them to "go to work for civilian firms, till we call you..."...
Yeah, put off, delay and forget about programs for weapons development...
Just like at Pearl Harbor, when the delayed electronics program of radar, was just beginning to come into use...
Just the way that the "new" technology of the radar site at Opana Point tracked the Imperial Japanese forces into Pearl and no one would trust the data...
Just the way that Bell P-39s and Curtis P-40s would have to go up against the Mitsubishi A6M "Zero"...
That the men of Torpedo 8 would have to go up against the Imperial Japanese in Douglas Devastators, when they should have had the Grumman Avenger, another delayed program...
Then of course, there were the "bad" torpedoes that would run deep and make circular runs and wouldn't explode, when they hit the target...
Then of course, we had one of the smallest torpedo warheads of the day AND THEN, that wonderful "magnetic exploder", that was so "secret" and under tested, that none of the torpedomen, were allowed to even see it, let alone know how to work on it...
Ships, tanks, planes, submarines, battleships, all on the "drawing board" and delayed...
Ammunition so old, that when they tried to link it into the cloth belts during the attack on Pearl, that the belts literally fell apart in the loading machines...
Ammunition dated 1918...
Yeah, seems President Elect Obama wants to use the policies and plans of FDR, ALL OF THEM!...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

Originally posted by Bill_Wa:
Why would this surprise anybody. We all know the Scummander in Chief would cut and slash so he could appease his base. Of course new programs have bugs, it's part and parcel of being new. I rather suspect the first rock thrown had it's share of dificulties. We need these new systems, so get off the dime and implement them.
SEMPER FROG!

Rules of the site, disagree with the CinC's policies and programs, don't disrespect the office...
Just a word to the wise, to keep you out of trouble, with the mods...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

Originally posted by Jeannot23:

quote:

Originally posted by rayevinsonsr:

quote:

Originally posted by sgtjmackinjersey:
RE: http://www.military.com/forums/0,15240,181806,00.html

Wow, are we talking about change, or going back to the gool old days of the Clinton Era, where the Military was basically stripped of their materials and tools needed to complete the mission of DEFENDING the Country?

Why not just go back to horse back and stone throwing slings??? Heck, who needs a horse?

Look, I understand that the US Gov't spends a lot of money on defense contracts. I also understand that the Gov't WASTES a ton of money on unessary crap. But let's not lose sight of the mission and changing times.

Again, we need to get on the phones and call our friends and family and have them call their
Congressmen and Senators and remind them who they work for. They need to understand what is going on.

I know exactly where you're ocming from. Two of the ten U S Army divisions could not be deployed for the lack of readiness. Funny how people forget and try to hide these things. Even to the extent some undersecretary wanted to change the Marine uniform because it looked too "masculine" the administrations hatred for all things military was apparent. Al Gore spoke up and said no matter, we're still the best trained. But that didn't fly either, you can't train without equipment and guys in the field without ammo. Bang, bang, just doesn't get it. Including those that policed Serbia.

Both Bushes cut the military budget.

So did Clinton, so what's your point?...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

Originally posted by rayevinsonsr:

quote:

Originally posted by Jeannot23:

quote:

Originally posted by rayevinsonsr:

quote:

Originally posted by sgtjmackinjersey:
RE: http://www.military.com/forums/0,15240,181806,00.html

Wow, are we talking about change, or going back to the gool old days of the Clinton Era, where the Military was basically stripped of their materials and tools needed to complete the mission of DEFENDING the Country?

Why not just go back to horse back and stone throwing slings??? Heck, who needs a horse?

Look, I understand that the US Gov't spends a lot of money on defense contracts. I also understand that the Gov't WASTES a ton of money on unessary crap. But let's not lose sight of the mission and changing times.

Again, we need to get on the phones and call our friends and family and have them call their
Congressmen and Senators and remind them who they work for. They need to understand what is going on.

I know exactly where you're ocming from. Two of the ten U S Army divisions could not be deployed for the lack of readiness. Funny how people forget and try to hide these things. Even to the extent some undersecretary wanted to change the Marine uniform because it looked too "masculine" the administrations hatred for all things military was apparent. Al Gore spoke up and said no matter, we're still the best trained. But that didn't fly either, you can't train without equipment and guys in the field without ammo. Bang, bang, just doesn't get it. Including those that policed Serbia.

Both Bushes cut the military budget.

You're half right. The budget hasn't seen a cut by this President or the Congress since being in office and 911. In fact the Congress has voted for additional manpower during this last administration, something we haven't seen since Ron Reagan was in charge. The "Peace Dividend: handed to us by the end of the cold war was a natural phenomenon. So Papa Bush initiated the "Peace Dividend" and Clinton continue it. But that's not what I was discussing. Be prepared with what you've got. Secretary Cohen struggle through the explanation during a down time for the military. Congress was calling for resignations. One General called it a hollow military much like a boy scout camp, General Shinseki began a transition to look more like the Marine corp. I don't care if you got 10 or 20 division as long as they have the equipment and training. Same as the Navy, went from 600 ships to less half. The manpower may be less but remember your first paycheck. Mine was $19.90. So the military grew smaller, but with more toys that go boom where and when you need them. And a damn sight more professional.

Don't forget that Clinton gave us NAFTA and it's Asian counterparts...
Wonder why our economy is collapsing?...
Well, now you know...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81

quote:

Originally posted by lifer69:
Wow...two decades of research, it still won't be fielded until 2020 and they still have to "work out the bugs" once it is fielded? The technology will be out of date by the time its fielded. Are we a bunch of suckers or what?

Take it up with those that can't "FIND THE BUDGET"...
Respectfully, SUNLINER81