U.S.A. military

[mil-avia]

How Would You Rate the U.S. Military?

Op-Ed: Two Myths from Leon Panetta

The whole thing is provocative, but here are a few quotes. The lead:

The suggestion that meaningful spending cuts are some sort of "doomsday" is just one of the myths Leon Panetta has been spreading around the country. Another is that "the American military today is without question the finest fighting force that has ever existed."

A long comparison:

Panetta's "finest" U.S. Navy "that has ever existed" has shrunk from 316 battleforce ships in 2001 to 287 in 2011, a decline of 10 percent. It is not a smaller, newer fleet; it is a smaller, older fleet — about four years older per ship, on average, than it was in 2001. Also, for the past year the press has been constantly reporting on severe maintenance and readiness problems throughout the fleet.

Panetta's best-ever Air Force declined from 142 fighter and bomber squadrons to 72 during the same 2001-2012 period, a decline of 49 percent, and the inventory has increased to an all-time high average for aircraft age: 23 years. Fighter pilot air training hours today are one-half of what they were in the 1970s, an era not touted for high readiness.

The Army's brigade combat teams did grow from 44 to 45. But major Army equipment inventories are mostly older, and in 2006, the House Armed Services Committee leaked a memo documenting historic lows in the readiness of active Army units in the U.S. The analysis has not been publicly updated; we should worry that it has gotten worse, not better.

We got this smaller, older, less ready force not because of less money but because of more. In addition to the $1.3 trillion spent on the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere, Congress and Presidents Bush and Obama added another $1 trillion to the "base" (non-war) parts of the defense budget.

Another:

He put a lot of rhetoric around his solicitude for the troops both at the Wilson Center and later at the House Armed Services Committee, but it is beginning to emerge that his real budget priorities are to cut people first and hardware last.

This is something I'm really concerned about. Our troops who have deployed in the last 10 years have often borne a terrible burden. It would be morally unconscionable to not take care of them, but I fear that's where we're headed.

Obviously, CDI's methodology for evaluating America's military power is not the only potential one. But it's worth considering.

How about you? What do you think? How does the current and near-future U.S. military measure up?




Related link : Why is the press ignoring Panetta’s frenzied rhetoric and data-free myths?

 

[Eliphalet35]

I find the military repulsive. I hate the culture surrounding it. I hate how much money the United States puts into it. I hate how it's not even an option to cut military spending in the political atmosphere of the Unite states. I hate that the United States is fighting in 5 wars. I hate how we torture people. I hate how we kill civilians. I hate how we throw money at unstable countries in the hopes they won't stab us in the back.

That being said, I still might join since the status quo will never change and it's a great way to pay off college debt.

 

[Chogy]

^^ easily one of the strangest posts I have ever read.

If the military repulses you, stay far, far away. You are not wanted. Go occupy Wall street or something.

It does take self-discipline and sacrifice to be in the military of any nation. Only people not self-obsessed need apply.

 

[regular]

I find the military repulsive. I hate the culture surrounding it. I hate how much money the United States puts into it. I hate how it's not even an option to cut military spending in the political atmosphere of the Unite states. I hate that the United States is fighting in 5 wars. I hate how we torture people. I hate how we kill civilians. I hate how we throw money at unstable countries in the hopes they won't stab us in the back.

That being said, I still might join since the status quo will never change and it's a great way to pay off college debt.

Yes! U absolutely right can't deny that.....

 

[T90TankGuy]

I find the military repulsive. I hate the culture surrounding it. I hate how much money the United States puts into it. I hate how it's not even an option to cut military spending in the political atmosphere of the Unite states. I hate that the United States is fighting in 5 wars. I hate how we torture people. I hate how we kill civilians. I hate how we throw money at unstable countries in the hopes they won't stab us in the back.

That being said, I still might join since the status quo will never change and it's a great way to pay off college debt.

wow . not seen a post with that much hypocrisy for a while . since you hate everything so much . you sure your high moral standards will not take a hit should you join?

 

[anon45]

I find the military repulsive. I hate the culture surrounding it. I hate how much money the United States puts into it. I hate how it's not even an option to cut military spending in the political atmosphere of the Unite states. I hate that the United States is fighting in 5 wars. I hate how we torture people. I hate how we kill civilians. I hate how we throw money at unstable countries in the hopes they won't stab us in the back.

That being said, I still might join since the status quo will never change and it's a great way to pay off college debt.

Aren't you rather decidedly more repulsive than what you hate for joining the military 'knowing' that you will be killing civilians, torturing people, etc.? Hopefully if you do join and show the appropriate amount of discipline to be accepted you'll lose your preconceptions.

 

[Stormweaver]

I find the military repulsive. I hate the culture surrounding it. I hate how much money the United States puts into it. I hate how it's not even an option to cut military spending in the political atmosphere of the Unite states. I hate that the United States is fighting in 5 wars. I hate how we torture people. I hate how we kill civilians. I hate how we throw money at unstable countries in the hopes they won't stab us in the back.

Basically, you will tolerate everything you hate if properly compensated... do you have any principles?
While a lot of people here love America, hate America, love the West, hate the West etc. everyone finds a person who exchanges their ideals for money, repulsive.

All I can say is that stay as far away from the military as possible.

Lastly, hope for your sake that no one ever finds your posts if you do join the military...

 

[pkHuss]

I think we need to look at this information in context. The kind of wars the US military fights have changed considerably since Vietnam. They have been in a perpetual state of war for a decade, and probably will be for at least another decade. And these aren't conventional wars, they are against suicidal urban guerrillas. To measure the strength of the US military in terms of how many ships they have and how old their bomber fleets are, is a bit outdated. Intelligence gathering is probably going to be their biggest priority in the coming years, and that requires a different kind of military, and a different kind of defense spending.

 

[American Pakistani]

I find the military repulsive. I hate the culture surrounding it. I hate how much money the United States puts into it. I hate how it's not even an option to cut military spending in the political atmosphere of the Unite states. I hate that the United States is fighting in 5 wars. I hate how we torture people. I hate how we kill civilians. I hate how we throw money at unstable countries in the hopes they won't stab us in the back.

That being said, I still might join since the status quo will never change and it's a great way to pay off college debt.

, this is the most funniest post i've read here at PDF.

 

[mil-avia]

Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld complained that there were 17 levels of staff between him and a line officer.

 

[mil-avia]

'Geriatric' U.S. Arsenal Needs Expensive Face-Lift

 

[IronsightSniper]

I should note some inaccuracies in his critique of the U.S. Armed Forces.

Yes, the size and scope of the U.S. Armed Forces has shrunk, mostly due to the fact that the Cold War ended and the need to maintain a large force to counter and equally large force ended then and there.

However, the quality of the equipment has changed. In place of aging fighters we got ourselves several F-22 Raptors, which are, indeed, the best fighters to yet exist. In place of the oversized, shock n' awe B-52s, we've received sleek and sexy, painted in black, B-2's, which are, in any sense of the word, the best strategic bombers in the world. The "Great White Fleet" has also received, arguably, the best attack submarines in the world, too, the Virginia Class. Same can be said for the Army. The majority, if not all Abrams have been upgraded to M1A2's.

Upgrades are always coming in. The problem of course is, being the best overall military in the world, comes at a cost, and upgrading everything takes time and lots and lots of money.

 

[pakistanitarzan]

how would i rate?
America, Fuckk yeaaaahhhhh!