What would a smaller military look like and how would it fight?

[longknife]

Jan. 21, 2014 -

An MV-22B Osprey disembarks Marines Dec. 9 at Baker runway on Tinian's North Field during Exercise Forager Fury II. (Lance Cpl. Antonio Rubio / Marine Corps)

By Tom Vandebrook, USA Today

USA Today reported over the weekend that the Army has been told to plan to lop off 100,000 soldiers if the automatic budget cuts known as sequestration continue until the end of the decade. Army brass are coming to terms with what a force of 420,000 could and could not do. It has about 530,000 soldiers now. The other services will be taking hits, too, according to a senior Pentagon official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the details are not public.

An interesting read with links @ What would a smaller military look like and how would it fight? | Military Times | militarytimes.com

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Downsizing the military's a good idea. Future wars will rely less and less on brute force and more and more on technology. Don't need all those tanks if not worrying about a Soviet invasion of Germany any more et al. A strong Navy and Air Force and modest Army and Marines are all we need at this point. So long as we maintain a credible nuclear threat, being invaded is very unlikely. So maintaining equipment with land wars in mind is foolish if that money can go to aircraft and aircraft carriers. Whatever's saved downsizing the Army and Marines should be redirected into research and development. Several nations projecting fowards will have technology equal to our own right now down the road, coming up with ways of countering our own capabilities in the hands of enemies is more worthwhile than maintaining obsolete weapons systems for threats all but impossible.

 

[whitehall]

You have to consider the threat. The fall of the USSR made the gigantic Navy warships virtually obsolete but yet the fat assed old Pentagon sailors keep demanding more and bigger ships which use up more fossil fuel (with some exceptions) cruising around the world. The tragedy of the USS Cole showed that the Navy can't even defend itself against a plywood Cris-Craft. The Army has shrunk without the draft and all the pretty babe Soldiers are doing nothing but taking up space. The Navy warships have become floating brothels with alarming pregnancy rates kept secret by the Military. Liberal administrations keep picking at the venerable USMC and sooner or later it will shrink.

 

[Borillar]

You have to consider the threat. The fall of the USSR made the gigantic Navy warships virtually obsolete but yet the fat assed old Pentagon sailors keep demanding more and bigger ships which use up more fossil fuel (with some exceptions) cruising around the world. The tragedy of the USS Cole showed that the Navy can't even defend itself against a plywood Cris-Craft. The Army has shrunk without the draft and all the pretty babe Soldiers are doing nothing but taking up space. The Navy warships have become floating brothels with alarming pregnancy rates kept secret by the Military. Liberal administrations keep picking at the venerable USMC and sooner or later it will shrink.

Getting caught with your pants down once doesn't equate to the entire Navy being defenseless against some assholes in a skiff. The Navy is the only way the country has to project force in many parts of the world. The Marines should be left alone. They can't shrink much more and remain a credible force.

A smaller military should look like the Marines. Land, Air, and Sea elements that go in, kick ass, and get the fuck out.

 

[JakeStarkey]

A smaller Army, a USMC of 1.5 divisions with their own air support, a Navy and Air Force that can project hard power into the other continents, particularly at the Straits of Hormuz and along the sea lanes to Australia, Japan, and Europe. Continue to develop energy sources in the US while coordinating more closely with Mexico and Candada for imports.