|
I think the Marines probably should've been eliminated after ww2 as joint operations with the army were incredibly unnecessarily difficult due to the nature of the two armies. That being said, there's really no point getting rid of them now, there are much bigger fish to fry in terms of stupidity in US force structure.
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 19:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 08:01 |
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:I think when people say "special forces" they generally mean the whole of SOCOM (Delta Force, Navy Seals, Rangers, Green Berets etc.) rather than the Green Berets specifically They often do, but when people within SOCOM say "special forces" they almost always do mean the green berets specifically. In fact, the green berets is the informal name for the organization formally known as Special Forces. Hence why I tried to clarify.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 19:31
|
|
|
How much "What's going on in the outside world" do SSBN crew get on a patrol anyway? I'm imagining some crewmen who went to sea in January and getting a hell of a shock when they come back.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 19:43
|
|
|
Better to downsize the Army by 90%, and only reconstitute it when there is an emergency big enough for the draft. The Marines, Navy, and a smaller AF are enough to fight pirates and advance imperialism overseas. The US (arguably) didn’t have a standing army for most of its history, and having one seems to make people want to use it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 20:01
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:we're a week and a half into lockdown and already a marines/navy argument has broken out...pray for us... I mean, it feels like it comes up like every 3-4 months in the Cold War/Airpower thread. Kinda surprised it hasn’t happened here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 20:04
|
|
|
LingcodKilla posted:
LOL, nearly every budget request the Air Force puts in has some element of, "If you give us this money to acquire this capability you can save money by getting rid of the <ARMY|NAVY|MARINES|COAST GUARD>. They have all developed specialized capabilities that are useful. If you didn't have a Marine Corps you would have a uh, large force in the army or navy (4 combat divisions and attendant support and the additional required aircraft) reporting up to a 4 star in that service with budget requests that overlap which ever of army or navy that force isn't in. Like, moving the organization isn't going to change what you need to do/have to support that mission set. If you move the Marines under the Army you have, what? A bunch of soldiers who train to spend most of their time on ships? If you move the Marines to be part of the Navy you have, what? A bunch of sailors who spend most of their time training to conduct ground operations? Worse you have a bunch of officers who are stuck in the red-headed step child sub branch of a team of people who spend an order of magnitude more time, effort and resources conducting a different mission. Good luck staffing that with capable and enthusiastic leaders.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 20:08
|
|
|
Murgos posted:Worse you have a bunch of officers who are stuck in the red-headed step child sub branch of a team of people who spend an order of magnitude more time, effort and resources conducting a different mission. Good luck staffing that with capable and enthusiastic leaders. But enough about missile people in the Air Force
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 20:27
|
|
|
Remulak posted:Better to downsize the Army by 90%, and only reconstitute it when there is an emergency big enough for the draft. The Marines, Navy, and a smaller AF are enough to fight pirates and advance imperialism overseas. Oooh I like this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 20:45
|
|
|
Remulak posted:Better to downsize the Army by 90%, and only reconstitute it when there is an emergency big enough for the draft. The Marines, Navy, and a smaller AF are enough to fight pirates and advance imperialism overseas. this approach was more feasible when armies consisted mainly of conscripts you could teach to march and shoot a rifle within a couple of weeks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 21:05
|
|
|
Artillery should be its own service branch, if that had happened then the US wouldn't have defunded its Tank Destroyer capability. Then the Marines wouldn't have to worry about needing tanks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 21:10
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:we're a week and a half into lockdown and already a marines/navy argument has broken out...pray for us... Yeah, it is a stupid thing to argue about. I didn't start it, and I will step out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 21:11
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:we're a week and a half into lockdown and already a marines/navy argument has broken out...pray for us...
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 21:28
|
|
|
FWIW, I'm mostly talking about the folks I've seen join Naked and Afraid, which currently counts: 1 SEAL, 2 GBs, one unidentified (but army) and a bunch of chair force grunts who did SERE and all did terribly. Anyway, surely we must know something about their requirements and evals? If nothing else from ad materials and studies..
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 22:13
|
|
|
Remulak posted:Better to downsize the Army by 90%, and only reconstitute it when there is an emergency big enough for the draft. The Marines, Navy, and a smaller AF are enough to fight pirates and advance imperialism overseas. After WWII the US did just that. Then the Korean war started and pointed out the fact that armies no longer have months to train before being committed to fight. ("No more Task Force Smiths.")
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 22:21
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:Are you trying to give me an aneurysm? I'm aware it isn't "real"... It's why I used the word apocryphal.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 22:37
|
|
|
Tias posted:FWIW, I'm mostly talking about the folks I've seen join Naked and Afraid, which currently counts: 1 SEAL, 2 GBs, one unidentified (but army) and a bunch of chair force grunts who did SERE and all did terribly. I'm gonna bet the crazy person was the SEAL? Because they're basically this: Murgos posted:If you move the Marines to be part of the Navy you have, what? A bunch of sailors who spend most of their time training to conduct ground operations? With the caveat that their reputation is established by books written by crazy people, so the rank and file are enthusiastic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 22:38
|
|
|
Deptfordx posted:How much "What's going on in the outside world" do SSBN crew get on a patrol anyway? Just a wild rear end guess but any time they come up near the surface to get non-ELF/VLF coms contact they're going to be able to get at least shortwave broadcast news like the BBC/VOA and regional broadcasts (Radio Japan, Radio New Zealand, Korean World Broadcast, etc), and I think AFRTS still has shortwave broadcasts in the pacific. Allegedly British SSBNs used to have orders to check to see if the BBC longwave service is still broadcasting if the balloon has gone up and they can't get in contact any other way, and then launch if it's off the air. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CxHa5KaMBcM
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 22:49
|
|
|
Tias posted:FWIW, I'm mostly talking about the folks I've seen join Naked and Afraid, which currently counts: 1 SEAL, 2 GBs, one unidentified (but army) and a bunch of chair force grunts who did SERE and all did terribly. I just read a book about Special Forces and, when it was written at least, they had both tests and a lot of emphasis on peer grading. Candidates had to be good teammates and good trainers. That doesn't mean you actually have to be a good guy, though. There's a reason that "you can trust me with your life, but not your money or your wife" is a mantra for some people.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 22:51
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:I'm gonna bet the crazy person was the SEAL? Yeah. He thought empathy "lost its evolutionary purpose 15,000 years ago" and that it "was a character flaw". When he was upstaged in freediving and survivalism by a 20-something chick who kicked rear end at it some five-ten times, he eventually caved and admitted that his current philosophy didn't serve him well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 23:40
|
|
|
C.M. Kruger posted:
Did boomer captains know exactly what target they'd be hitting, since that seems important for a moving launch site? I know that ICBM crews didn't know what their targets would be, even after they launched.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 23:51
|
|
|
If you have Amazon Prime, check out 'How to command a nuclear submarine': https://www.amazon.co.uk/For-Your-Eyes-Only/dp/B07RD9WYN3/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=submarine&qid=1585524446&s=instant-video&sr=1-1 Old 4 part BBC documentary following the Perisher Course.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 00:28
|
|
|
Chamale posted:Did boomer captains know exactly what target they'd be hitting, since that seems important for a moving launch site? I know that ICBM crews didn't know what their targets would be, even after they launched. Dunno but I'd bet "they probably have a good idea", since the shorter range of the missiles means that the officers are going to need more information for getting into range, and the Navy is probably a little more trustworthy of it's officers. (or for the British, overly trustworthy) From what I've been able to find in old publications, the missiles themselves have a preset list of targets that can be updated/changed, and in late 2003 the US Navy began fitting the Ohios with a new "SLBM Strategic Retargeting System" that apparently lets them rapidly switch between target sets. Presumably the SRS would also let the crew input coordinates directly if they were given the proper unlock codes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 00:45
|
|
|
I'm sure that some people would see the current conversation as a derail since it's not military history, but I'd love to learn more. Also, everyone has clearly overlooked the obvious move of rebranding the Marines as the Space Force (space marines!).MikeCrotch posted:I think when people say "special forces" they generally mean the whole of SOCOM (Delta Force, Navy Seals, Rangers, Green Berets etc.) rather than the Green Berets specifically I hadn't even heard of Delta Force before, so I did a little googling. I guess whenever I heard the names of these elite sub-units of the military, I had always assumed that each branch had their own and that was it. But it looks like Green Berets and Rangers are both Army, and then I found this Wikipedia page and it's like... holy gently caress there are SO MANY different units like this and these descriptions do not do a good job of explaining the differences between them for a layperson. Also, the dumbest part of my brain wants to do a "who wins in a fight???" deal and check to see if that Deadliest Warrior show ever did an episode comparing them all. ...I also kind of want to know if the Coast Guard in and of itself would equal or beat any other nation's navy. Quarantine is driving me nuts. Panzeh posted:I think the Marines probably should've been eliminated after ww2 as joint operations with the army were incredibly unnecessarily difficult due to the nature of the two armies. That being said, there's really no point getting rid of them now, there are much bigger fish to fry in terms of stupidity in US force structure. What do you see as the big structural deficiencies of the U.S. military?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 00:56
|
|
|
The only good Deadliest Warrior episode was IRA vs Taliban
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 02:51
|
|
|
GotLag posted:The only good Deadliest Warrior episode was
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 02:55
|
|
|
Cessna posted:Yeah, it is a stupid thing to argue about. I didn't start it, and I will step out. Please don't. The greatest enemy of the "lol abolish Marines hurrr" argument is people who actually know things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 02:56
|
|
|
Would space marines be useful if nations had like bases on the moon or mars and we needed to take them over?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 03:15
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I'm aware it isn't "real"... It's why I used the word apocryphal. It's dumb orientalist nonsense and shouldn't be repeated. It's pure fiction and has nothing to do with anything real. Also "apocryphal" is generally used to mean "possible but unlikely" not "definitely 100% false and so shown by doing even basic research."
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 03:29
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:It's dumb orientalist nonsense and shouldn't be repeated. That is literally not what it means though. "(of a story or statement) of doubtful authenticity, although widely circulated as being true." which matches that phrase to a T. Additionally that is just one small non-integral part of a moderately sized post, and not essential to the thrust of the post. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 03:38 on Mar 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 03:35
|
|
|
You opened with a statement you know to be false about Chinese history and philosophy and have to back-pedal on a semantic argument about how false "apocryphal" is as a meaning. No I'm not going to debate your other incredibly stupid ideas about a person you can't even spell the name of. Which translation did you read? It's going to vary a lot between them. And as I said, none of them are really accurate and good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 03:43
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:You opened with a statement you know to be false about Chinese history and philosophy and have to back-pedal on a semantic argument about how false "apocryphal" is as a meaning. It's not a semantic argument when you actually didn't know what apocryphal means and because of that proceeded to misunderstand and completely changed the context of my post to mean something entirely not what I actually meant. You don't have to debate anything you don't want to, but please don't accuse me or "trying to give you a aneurysm" because you misunderstood my post. e: Also I have no idea what you're talking about. I didn't specify any Chinese authors in that post, or specify any books by any Chinese source. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 03:54 on Mar 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 03:51
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Would space marines be useful if nations had like bases on the moon or mars and we needed to take them over? Why not just nuke them? You still need a rocket to get there but a nuclear warhead doesn't need life support systems and it only needs to make a one way trip.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 03:54
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Why not just nuke them? What if we want what's there? There's a million reasons why resorting to nuclear weapons or death from above may not be appropriate or an excessive escalation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 03:55
|
|
|
surf rock posted:Also, the dumbest part of my brain wants to do a "who wins in a fight???" deal and check to see if that Deadliest Warrior show ever did an episode comparing them all. ...I also kind of want to know if the Coast Guard in and of itself would equal or beat any other nation's navy. In general it'd be about the individual, they're all well trained in the combat side of things but most of the groups have their own specialty that isn't just killing people. There's general tiers, where DEVGRU/SFOD-D are more elite than SEALS/Special Forces which are again more elite than groups like Rangers, but it isn't the sort of thing where you'd get promoted from one to another so you'll have exceptional individuals in any of them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 03:59
|
|
|
Yes I'm well aware you didn't cite anyone and just said vague things. You were wrong and silly to do this because you are not backed up by any of the source material. Bonus, you don't know what "apocryphal" or "semantic" means so you're most of the way to a hat-trick. Please stop talking about anything to do with Ancient China. Your ignorance is staggering.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 04:00
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:Yes I'm well aware you didn't cite anyone and just said vague things. You were wrong and silly to do this because you are not backed up by any of the source material. Okay, would you like to know what books I've read. Although I don't think I've seen anyone in this thread proactively specify their sources when discussing historical topics, either because its their topic of expertese or because my understanding it's a casual thread and posts on a forum don't necessarily need citation unless someone asks? Or are otherwise recommending a book, but if you want I can try to dig up every book I've read back when I was a history+polisci major back in University and was actively taking topics of Chinese history every chance I got before I switched to Computer Science and became a computer toucher. But that was probably close to 10 years ago and admittedly it may be difficult to pull out a complete list and it may take some time; I did specify Susan L Shirk's work in a previous post, though not in that post in particular. I also don't think I said anything too vague, yes it's very general claims but it was a very general discussion prompted by the plot of a action movie so I'm not sure how it was supposed to be more specific when it was pretty casual from the beginning. If Ensign Expendable thinks the way I approached the topic is unacceptable or not in keeping with the thread etiquette of keeping an open mind and being open to being wrong about things when discussing things with experts (in which you clearly are) then sure I could stop but I don't think I've been spouting off anything ignorant or unreasonable for a university level education in the West.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 04:19
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:What if we want what's there? There's a million reasons why resorting to nuclear weapons or death from above may not be appropriate or an excessive escalation. The problem tends to be that you’d have to spend massive amount of resources to obtain an asset that has very limited capabilities and very high likelyhood of failure. On ”raid a moon base, in, out, no Need for batteries to NVG’s” a’la Somalia you first need transport to moon, insertion from orbit, extraction to orbit, and transport back. All of which are rather risky If the enemy has space stingers/MoonShilkas since there really isnt such a thing as crash landing a lunar shuttle. In addition anything goes wrong during the operation and everyone suffocates/dies anyway. So basically something US would seem Perfect to spend some of dat defense budget on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 04:20
|
|
|
Valtonen posted:The problem tends to be that you’d have to spend massive amount of resources to obtain an asset that has very limited capabilities and very high likelyhood of failure. On ”raid a moon base, in, out, no Need for batteries to NVG’s” a’la Somalia you first need transport to moon, insertion from orbit, extraction to orbit, and transport back. All of which are rather risky If the enemy has space stingers/MoonShilkas since there really isnt such a thing as crash landing a lunar shuttle. In addition anything goes wrong during the operation and everyone suffocates/dies anyway. For there to be bases to worry about capturing in the first place, we;d have to have a massive reduction in the cost of space travel.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 04:25
|
|
|
You're mistaken and are spouting lies. Please stop. I'm trying to drink less. Whatever books you've read have been very bad and you shouldn't take anything from them. And it was talking about a film through the lens of a larger philosophical structure and taking about how that relates to Chinese history. That wasn't subtext, it was text. Just stop. Please dear god. I'm not even a real Sinologist, I'm just a linguist who works with old Chinese poo poo and you're wounding me. Edit : I'm happy to explain to you in detail how wrong you are about literally all of China, but I charge money for that kind of thing. Xiahou Dun fucked around with this message at 04:29 on Mar 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 04:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 08:01 |
|
|
In the foreseeable future, if we established a permanent moon/mars base and the inhabitants started a mutiny or something... If they are not a death cult who don't care if they all die, the question is are they fully self-sufficient. If not, the easiest way to get them back to fold is to not send them supplies until they surrender or die. This is called 'siege'. If they are fully self-sufficient then the next most efficient way would be a tactical missile strike to destroy their self-sufficiency. If they are fully self-sufficient and have all systems protected deep in Martian mine tunnels and can't be hurt from above (not even solar arrays) then I think things get a bit more complicated.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 04:32
|
|