h/t Jamie, who editorializes; I’m by no means any kind of a military expert, but it doesn’t take a Wellington to figure out that the metamorphosis of the US military as envisioned and promoted by General David Perkins in this address to the World Affairs Council in Washington DC is nothing but “doing less with less”. It is a retreat rather than a refocus. (Skip the first 4:30 of this hour-long production).
Doing less with less usually means many more casualties to be explained away in the future.
British PM Stanley Baldwin left exactly such a scenario for his successors by starving the armed forces while he was in office.
Suppose it might work if the economies of the USA, China, and Russia all collapse at about the same time in the not too distant future.
So what happened when Rome brought the legions home and reduced their numbers… yeah, no parallels here.
Agreed. Collapse occurred not long after, but then I think you knew that before you asked.
A few main reasons for this waning are the amassing of the tremendous national debt appeasing the mob, the loss of the enterprising spirit among the mass of the population that wants only free phones and a good time, the loss of the moral underpinnings of society, and the takeover, the steering of the government by the mob, and the bringing in of barbarians who care not about what made America great. No doubt I missed a few.
When the US fought the First Gulf War it sent 500,000 troops. A dozen years later, the sent 150,000 to Gulf War 2. The shock and war was much diminished. They never did gain effective control of Iraq in Gulf 2. It’s now much worse. I suspect the reason they don’t want to fight ISIS is that winning might not be so easy. The long wars in Afghanistan and Iraq didn’t do much for the health of the National Guard and Reserves. Getting repeatedly called up and sent to endless wars nobody seemed to want to win discouraged recruitment of weekend warriors.
Y’all know, at least I hope i have been able to convey my dismay at the effectiveness of the Obama Administration, but; and it is a capital B-on the but; would any of the previous Administrations responded more effectively than the present one?
Rest assured I believe the alternative from the Democrat Party in 2008 would have not proven to been up to the task, as demonstrated both by her Secretary of State performance. Possibly a “Team Administration” would have proven effective, although the irresponsible approach to vote buying would be not very disimilar to Obama’s. Less focus on Race a probability.
How a Republican Administration under a Viet Nam Hero with a vibrant, itching to be noticed female sidekick, would deal with the unstoppable demographic changes in the Middle-East and especially in China is beyond my opining, but the spectre of a war through client states seems possible. The American electorate would not accept a ground war between The U.S and Allies with China. Any war of attrition with China is obviously foolhardy and the feckless Baby Boomer Amercian Bureaucracy, even with the technological advantage at the time, would not have worn down the entrenched Mandarin Class of China.
Having advanced the preamble I can now present my premise. I have come to believe in the Exceptionalism of the United States and it’s trusted “Frado” on it’s Northern border, Canada. The penetration of ordinary person not shackled by the European Vested Interests into the unexpolited expanse of North America is the touchstone of the Greatest Evolutionary Expansion of Civilization, except possibly the advance created with planned and managed Agriculture.
“Preservation of the Union” Lincoln’s watch-word to place a Taboo for Ever on Slavery will not stand in the way of a border rearrangement in North America. Isolation is a tangible reality of the United States Mid-west and Northern States. The same States which the Country of Canada, in it’s 100 mile deep penetration of it’s by the population mass are increasingly similar in backgrounds and philosophies as are the citizens in the bordering United States.
I don’t see a total collapse of the U.S.A. as the hegemony of China in Asia takes root over a larger expanse of Europe and facilitates the continuing separation of the “Stans” from Russia. China recognizes their ability to control the now larger population country of India will not be practical if not impossible with Religious-Political entranched tribalism, which India’s evolutionary heritage has left.
Islamism, based on the Faithful as the clientist foundation will flounder once again, as the reality of the preferred not paying taxes or developing productivity, collapses into a totalized acceptance of Islam and another return to Tribalism
As the Chinese quotation which has been kept in mind for millennium; “may your Children live in uninteresting times” is not likely to be the future for all Humans.
But! a sensible and continually developing culture will continue in North America. It is all part of the Evolutionary Plan however you describe the guiding force.
So america cuts back on its national defenses becuase of some dumb treaty signed by the usial political hacks while the enemy increases the war spending Typical of brain-dead liberals with their walnut sized brain
I recall the thoughts of my dad (1905-1984)…..
I said his dad remarked on the reduced need of numbers because of new weapons and better training…..
Dad said these notions always had to be abandoned in the reality of war.
For me…reality is that to occupy ground infantry is necessary…..you cannot occupy ground with an aircraft, a tank or a gun.
Gulf II proved that…the small formations rolled over and defeated Saddam’s army….but proved unable to successfully occupy.
Part of the problem was the ill-conceived notion of “nation building”…..
Well done Mike Sr.
A ton of gibberish neatly piled high but still smelling and looking like horseshit.
BCer
Why we haven’t won a war in 70 years is the fact that we have given up gratuitous killing and destruction. Unless you beat an enemy to the point of imminent destruction of his culture, war is a short-term inconvenience. Japan and Germany learned not to frig with us, Russia and China, not so much. The British did not rule 1/4 of the world by being nice. They killed everyone who rebelled plus most of his tribe.
And that is because SJWs now call the shots and will do so until our collapse in the face of the enemy.
Sasquatch is bang on, you have to hold the ground. Flyovers won’t do.
The real question is how Truman prepared the US public to accept the civilian casualties in the dropping of the 2 game changers. I think there may be similarities today
We now have 3 logical targets… Iran, Iraq, Syria
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/teacher/abomb.htm
“Doing less with less” was also how the US ended up with only one aircraft carrier in the Pacific early in WWII. We will never know how many brave soldiers, sailors, and airmen lost their lives because the idiots in our government let them down. It will happen again, because our Congress (and voters) have not gotten any smarter over time.
If you want peace, then prepare for war.
The early comments by the General alluded to just that. What is ‘needed’ is currently eclipsed by what can be afforded after the National Treasury has been plundered. The cookie jar is empty and the will of the people of not only the USA, but all of Western civilization is on the wane. The apathy of the population regarding national defence is driving the political discourse. I don’t believe for a moment that Obama’s National security advisors didn’t advise him on pulling troops out early from Iraq was pure folly. He was told. He chose to roll the dice for purely partisan political reasons, not national security. History will not treat Obama well in the years to come. This will be the biggest blight on his legacy.
The General seems to be looking through the correct lens as to what the Army should be planning for. This current administration will be long-gone before the real effects of this newly planned doctrine is implemented. It will also take years, if not decades, to enact all the changes the new war fighting doctrine is asking for.
On a strategic level, as opposed to tactical, the West and NATO has to cut-off at the knees the economic potential of our rivals if we plan to be around for the end-game. What gives out future enemies strength is our over-reliance on them to supply our manufacturing. As was done after Pearl Harbour, the national industrial might was harnessed for the war-effort. I believe that something similar can be enacted by strictly manipulating the tax-code to encourage domestic production. There must be some way to encourage ‘made in Canada/U.S.A.’ industrial production and entrepenurial spirit and innovation.
You have said a lot there arctic front – all of it good. The West has list its stomach for battle and craven leaders like Obama who have no real concerns about their nation are content to capitalize on this weakness. You have also nailed another point that that is just as worrisome: everything from penicillin to plane components are manufactured off-shore. In many cases, by China. Sovereignty for sale!
Henry V he ain’t…….
My goodness the western slide to the NDP travels on to the west and engulfs the er’s of B.C. or is it the hmmm? Regardless the time under the NDP has shown one must follow the path of the faithful, even on S.D.A.
Please give your head a shake er!!! and let some light into to fill the crevices. Y’all know the Rocky Mountain sized ones. Cheers;