- Reaction score
- 35
- Points
- 560
Zipper has a point, but not the one he thought he was making (hey, it happens)
We are thrashing about to have a "balanced" and "General purpose" armed forces without any clear definition of what it is we are supposed to do. I'm not talking in the Gen Hillier sense ("we kill people"), but in the more philosophical "why we kill people" sense. If we are killing people in far away places to ensure local instability doesn't boil over into regional or even international mayhem, then we need to concentrate on a particular type of force structure, which is generally light and expeditionary in nature. Extrapolating from this, we end up generating airbore forces and SOF units so we can "kill people" over there rather than waiting to deal with the problems over here.
If the people we want to kill are not local terrorists, criminal warlords or other miscreants, but work in organized armies using the power of the State to threaten neighbours etc., then we need more capable killing tools, and the means to transport and support these tools and equipment to the theater of operations. Iraq is the premier model, being a thorn in everyones side since the 1980s. Iran is certainly gunning for that spot now, as is North Korea, and there is a large body of opinion that China is also there.
The other thing is the end state we want to achieve. A commercial Republic like the United States really needs a Navy and Marines to launch punitive expeditions. An Imperial power needs legions which can defeat all comers and has the muscle and logistics to stay in place for years and decades (an Empire can be a Democracy, the Athenians converted the Delian league into their own Empire, and the British Empire was also a Constitutional Monarchy, with decisions made by parliament. How far the United States has gone down this path is a matter of debate).
We as a nation need to debate this issue and come to a consensus. If it is felt that killing people only involves terrorists and the like, then light, airborn forces and SOF are the way to go. If it is felt that State powers are the "real" threat, then medium and heavy forces with appropriate transport and logistics must be procured. If we really feel the need to be part of an Empire, then the size and composition of the forces will be much different and much larger than anything we currently envision, while punitive forces will also require a change in direction.
Although I have posted extensively on other threads about the organization of medium forces (since that is where we are at currently), if I had a clean sheet of paper I would be on the side of the airborne/expeditionary model for "firefighting" local and regional instability, with some medium forces that could follow up and act as a QRF for the deployed airborne forces. I would also like to see an expanded Navy which could support overseas deployments, and control and secure the shipping lanes vital to our trade. BMD would also be nice.
Airborne and SOF forces can be derived from a clean sheet of paper approach to what we want/need, as well as from the many arguments we see in previous posts.
We are thrashing about to have a "balanced" and "General purpose" armed forces without any clear definition of what it is we are supposed to do. I'm not talking in the Gen Hillier sense ("we kill people"), but in the more philosophical "why we kill people" sense. If we are killing people in far away places to ensure local instability doesn't boil over into regional or even international mayhem, then we need to concentrate on a particular type of force structure, which is generally light and expeditionary in nature. Extrapolating from this, we end up generating airbore forces and SOF units so we can "kill people" over there rather than waiting to deal with the problems over here.
If the people we want to kill are not local terrorists, criminal warlords or other miscreants, but work in organized armies using the power of the State to threaten neighbours etc., then we need more capable killing tools, and the means to transport and support these tools and equipment to the theater of operations. Iraq is the premier model, being a thorn in everyones side since the 1980s. Iran is certainly gunning for that spot now, as is North Korea, and there is a large body of opinion that China is also there.
The other thing is the end state we want to achieve. A commercial Republic like the United States really needs a Navy and Marines to launch punitive expeditions. An Imperial power needs legions which can defeat all comers and has the muscle and logistics to stay in place for years and decades (an Empire can be a Democracy, the Athenians converted the Delian league into their own Empire, and the British Empire was also a Constitutional Monarchy, with decisions made by parliament. How far the United States has gone down this path is a matter of debate).
We as a nation need to debate this issue and come to a consensus. If it is felt that killing people only involves terrorists and the like, then light, airborn forces and SOF are the way to go. If it is felt that State powers are the "real" threat, then medium and heavy forces with appropriate transport and logistics must be procured. If we really feel the need to be part of an Empire, then the size and composition of the forces will be much different and much larger than anything we currently envision, while punitive forces will also require a change in direction.
Although I have posted extensively on other threads about the organization of medium forces (since that is where we are at currently), if I had a clean sheet of paper I would be on the side of the airborne/expeditionary model for "firefighting" local and regional instability, with some medium forces that could follow up and act as a QRF for the deployed airborne forces. I would also like to see an expanded Navy which could support overseas deployments, and control and secure the shipping lanes vital to our trade. BMD would also be nice.
Airborne and SOF forces can be derived from a clean sheet of paper approach to what we want/need, as well as from the many arguments we see in previous posts.
) And thanks Majoor for expanding on what is really going on in my limited skull space. ;D
