| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Jandar
Joined: 11 Jun 2008
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 7:36 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Jandar wrote: |
Why project force, when all you need a cooperation?
|
You're kidding, right? Who needs a military, we have diplomacy! |
Walk softly but carry a big stick. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jandar
Joined: 11 Jun 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 7:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not saying that we don't need an Army. I am saying that using the Army under the umbrella of the Airforce is more practical and even more practical would be to leave all active service branches under the Navy.
"The mission of the United States Air Force
is to deliver sovereign options for the defense
of the United States of America and its global
interests � to fly and fight in Air, Space, and
Cyberspace.
Delivering sovereign options means
operating across the Joint Spectrum so that
we provide to the President scalable choices
that are unlimited by distance and time, and
span the entire range from humanitarian
assistance to nuclear strike. It includes the
powerful option to use timely information to
deter and to avoid use of kinetic weaponry. All
these options have one common foundation �
persistent, lethal, overwhelming air, space and
cyberspace power massed and brought to bear
anywhere, anytime. The criterion for victory is
to achieve the President�s aims, and the means
is dominance...."
Raising an Army should only be done during wartime.
Police actions should be carried out by the Navy much as was done at Tripoli.
Most of the Army is "Air Mobile" so why not view them as another weapon in the Airforce (Air Navy). We have Air Cavalry, Airborne Rangers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 1:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jandar wrote: |
I'm not saying that we don't need an Army. I am saying that using the Army under the umbrella of the Airforce is more practical and even more practical would be to leave all active service branches under the Navy.
"The mission of the United States Air Force
is to deliver sovereign options for the defense
of the United States of America and its global
interests � to fly and fight in Air, Space, and
Cyberspace.
Delivering sovereign options means
operating across the Joint Spectrum so that
we provide to the President scalable choices
that are unlimited by distance and time, and
span the entire range from humanitarian
assistance to nuclear strike. It includes the
powerful option to use timely information to
deter and to avoid use of kinetic weaponry. All
these options have one common foundation �
persistent, lethal, overwhelming air, space and
cyberspace power massed and brought to bear
anywhere, anytime. The criterion for victory is
to achieve the President�s aims, and the means
is dominance...."
Raising an Army should only be done during wartime.
Police actions should be carried out by the Navy much as was done at Tripoli.
Most of the Army is "Air Mobile" so why not view them as another weapon in the Airforce (Air Navy). We have Air Cavalry, Airborne Rangers. |
I think this is pretty good. The US doesn't need an army except when there is a full scale war.
I think the enemy loves it when the US puts ground troops in harms way.
Boots on the ground missions ought to taken out of the playbook.
The US army ought to be thanked for its service and then dismissed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 1:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jandar wrote: |
I'm not saying that we don't need an Army. I am saying that using the Army under the umbrella of the Airforce is more practical and even more practical would be to leave all active service branches under the Navy.
"The mission of the United States Air Force
is to deliver sovereign options for the defense
of the United States of America and its global
interests � to fly and fight in Air, Space, and
Cyberspace.
Delivering sovereign options means
operating across the Joint Spectrum so that
we provide to the President scalable choices
that are unlimited by distance and time, and
span the entire range from humanitarian
assistance to nuclear strike. It includes the
powerful option to use timely information to
deter and to avoid use of kinetic weaponry. All
these options have one common foundation �
persistent, lethal, overwhelming air, space and
cyberspace power massed and brought to bear
anywhere, anytime. The criterion for victory is
to achieve the President�s aims, and the means
is dominance...."
Raising an Army should only be done during wartime.
Police actions should be carried out by the Navy much as was done at Tripoli.
Most of the Army is "Air Mobile" so why not view them as another weapon in the Airforce (Air Navy). We have Air Cavalry, Airborne Rangers. |
Okay, fine. We can put the Army under the Air Force. But let's call this new organization 'The Army.'
Joo,
Outside of Clinton's intervention in Kosovo, name one war where U.S. Air power alone acheived all mission objectives. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 2:43 am Post subject: ... |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Outside of Clinton's intervention in Kosovo, name one war where U.S. Air power alone acheived all mission objectives. |
Has there been a war that the Navy won on its own? Or the Army?
I don't think the purpose of the Air Force is to win wars on its own. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Jandar wrote: |
I'm not saying that we don't need an Army. I am saying that using the Army under the umbrella of the Airforce is more practical and even more practical would be to leave all active service branches under the Navy.
"The mission of the United States Air Force
is to deliver sovereign options for the defense
of the United States of America and its global
interests � to fly and fight in Air, Space, and
Cyberspace.
Delivering sovereign options means
operating across the Joint Spectrum so that
we provide to the President scalable choices
that are unlimited by distance and time, and
span the entire range from humanitarian
assistance to nuclear strike. It includes the
powerful option to use timely information to
deter and to avoid use of kinetic weaponry. All
these options have one common foundation �
persistent, lethal, overwhelming air, space and
cyberspace power massed and brought to bear
anywhere, anytime. The criterion for victory is
to achieve the President�s aims, and the means
is dominance...."
Raising an Army should only be done during wartime.
Police actions should be carried out by the Navy much as was done at Tripoli.
Most of the Army is "Air Mobile" so why not view them as another weapon in the Airforce (Air Navy). We have Air Cavalry, Airborne Rangers. |
Okay, fine. We can put the Army under the Air Force. But let's call this new organization 'The Army.'
Joo,
Outside of Clinton's intervention in Kosovo, name one war where U.S. Air power alone acheived all mission objectives. |
The answer is zero, however air power keeps becoming more effective all the time.
Compare Vietnam with the gulf war.
American soldiers become hostages to the enemy , the enemy wants the US to put boots on the ground and they are perfectly willing to trade 20 of theirs to get one of ours The US needs to find a better way to fight. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kiknkorea
Joined: 16 May 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 6:49 am Post subject: Re: ... |
|
|
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Outside of Clinton's intervention in Kosovo, name one war where U.S. Air power alone acheived all mission objectives. |
Has there been a war that the Navy won on its own? Or the Army?
I don't think the purpose of the Air Force is to win wars on its own. |
Very true. They are, however, an essential element of the US armed forces. No one branch of the service wins much outside of battles on their own. Only by being available and able to assist one another can any significant objective be achieved. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| No one branch of the service wins much outside of battles on their own. |
That's what I just said, no? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 3:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Armies win wars by taking and holding ground. Navies enable them to do so. Navies also project power abroad and protect communications and transportation routes. Has always been so.
Air power is nice, but not in the same league. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 3:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
Armies win wars by taking and holding ground. Navies enable them to do so. Navies also project power abroad and protect communications and transportation routes. Has always been so.
Air power is nice, but not in the same league. |
change the objectives |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leslie Cheswyck
Joined: 31 May 2003
Location: University of Western Chile
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You don't change the objective(s) to suit the tool.
Ah, screw it, let's just merge the USAF with the Imperial Forces.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Leslie Cheswyck wrote: |
You don't change the objective(s) to suit the tool.
Ah, screw it, let's just merge the USAF with the Imperial Forces. |
It depends. I would say destroying the military of the enemy and killing the leadership are pretty effective ways of fighting a war. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leslie Cheswyck
Joined: 31 May 2003
Location: University of Western Chile
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 5:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Indeed, but the tool must suit the task. Always.
Not the other way around.
Besides, you don't always need to destroy the enemy's (entire) army or kill the leadership. In the the Spanish-American War we did neither.
And, mods, why can't I post a pic here?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
