- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What is the Justification For Having an Army, Navy, AND a Marine Corps?
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:27 am to broadhead
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:27 am to broadhead
1. The Marines only take up about 4% of the defense budget. You would probably see very little, if any, cost savings if the USMC were broken out into pieces and absorbed by Big Army and Big Navy
2. There is still a need for naval infantry, and that institutional knowledge will not be easily transferred (if at all)
3. The competition between the USMC and the Army is healthy and breeds a better quality force for both
4. If you're really a soldier, then you'd know unit cohesion and espirit de corps matter a shite load, and that's something not easily replicated. The Marines have it in spades, and it adds quite a bit to our fighting abilities
2. There is still a need for naval infantry, and that institutional knowledge will not be easily transferred (if at all)
3. The competition between the USMC and the Army is healthy and breeds a better quality force for both
4. If you're really a soldier, then you'd know unit cohesion and espirit de corps matter a shite load, and that's something not easily replicated. The Marines have it in spades, and it adds quite a bit to our fighting abilities
1
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:27 am to Darth_Vader
I know the difference. I meant deploying a brigade, not the entire division.
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:27 am to Pettifogger
quote:
This is one of those posts where I wish it was something someone said at a bar so I could witness the outcome
Did you check OPs knuckles?
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:28 am to AbuTheMonkey
Yeah, don't we barely feed and outfit USMC? Sounds like a lot of ROI to me
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:28 am to Darth_Vader
That's a real response and valid argument!
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:29 am to Poncho
Yeah, man. Let's cut the military and become less strong.
I'm sure nothing bad will happen... including LOTS of loss of life, destabilization, and obviously TONS of monetary instability worldwide.
I'm sure nothing bad will happen... including LOTS of loss of life, destabilization, and obviously TONS of monetary instability worldwide.
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:29 am to Poncho
I read something a while ago that helped put our military spending into perspective for me. Maybe someone can correct me if this is a misconception, but it seems to make sense to me.
One of the biggest reasons that our military budget is so much larger than most country's budget is the fact that the standard of living in the US is so much higher than most of the World. American citizens expect to be paid more to be in the military than other country's citizens expect to be paid by their respective countries to be in their military. A lot of the extra cost we incur is personnel and pretty much unavoidable. Unless we want to start just outsourcing that too.
One of the biggest reasons that our military budget is so much larger than most country's budget is the fact that the standard of living in the US is so much higher than most of the World. American citizens expect to be paid more to be in the military than other country's citizens expect to be paid by their respective countries to be in their military. A lot of the extra cost we incur is personnel and pretty much unavoidable. Unless we want to start just outsourcing that too.
This post was edited on 1/15/16 at 11:37 am
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:29 am to SUB
quote:
restructure our military to make it more efficient. It doesn't sound like he is saying we should scale back our defenses, but rather rethink the structure to cut costs, eliminate redundancies, and improve it overall. It baffles me that anyone would think that is a dumb idea. If you disagree, explain why.
how do you know its not running as efficiently as possible right now?
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:30 am to Poncho
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:33 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
Cutting out an entire branch is not the answer, but we do waste billions a year in updating antiquated notions of military strength (like we're really going to get into a tank war in 2016?) that we are extremely unlikely to utilize.
We've cut back significantly on armored units since 1990 or so. There are only 10 HBCT's (about 2 1/2 divisions worth) in the force now. We still need to have that capability and be able to scale if necessary.
We used tanks quite a bit in Iraq, especially early. They're still very useful. In addition to that, one can never really predict the nature of future wars, but I would imagine they'll be some sort of state/insurgent hybrid (like Ukraine and Syria) where tanks are quite useful.
quote:
And you're right in that this nonsense takes up WAY WAY WAY more of the budget than food stamps do.
I think for most fiscal conservatives who like a strong defense posture, SSA, healthcare (Medicare and Medicaid), and debt service are the big bugaboos that they care about reigning in.
quote:
Where were these so called "fiscal conservatives" when we wasted a trillion dollars under the last GOP administration on our last Middle Eastern adventure?
Iraq was wasteful as hell, so no excuses. It was still only about 2 years worth of Social Security spending.
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:36 am to Draconian Sanctions
quote:
like we're really going to get into a tank war in 2016?
Oh god don't get darth started on tanks
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:36 am to Topwater Trout
quote:
marines a branch of the navy? is that what you mean by consolidating them?
We're a department of the navy....the men's department.
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:36 am to AbuTheMonkey
quote:
I think for most fiscal conservatives who like a strong defense posture, SSA, healthcare (Medicare and Medicaid), and debt service are the big bugaboos that they care about reigning in.
you can't be a true fiscal conservative when you give an entire branch of government a pass on their 600 billion plus a year budget.
quote:
It was still only about 2 years worth of Social Security spending.
At least those SS dollars actually, you know, were put to some kind of positive use for real Americans.
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:36 am to Poncho
quote:
I know the difference. I meant deploying a brigade, not the entire division.
Very well. But the point still stands. They could announce today that the Marine Corps is being dissolved effective immediately. How would that save one dime? The mission the Marines currently fill would still need to be filled. We'd still need troops with the same training and equipment the Marines currently use. And they'd still have to be deployed in the same exact places where Marines are currently deployed. Like I said before, all you'd accomplish is making the Marines change out their uniforms and paint over the "US Marines" on their vehicles and equipment and replace it with "US Army". How exactly does that save money? If you can tell me that, I'm all ears.
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:38 am to Poncho
You should try to read the US Constitution you were sworn to defend:
-US Constitution
There is no requirement for an Army in the Constitution as the founders feared a standing army. A Navy with a Marine fighting force could project power outward and was decided is the best form of defense of the United States.
quote:
To provide and maintain a Navy;
-US Constitution
There is no requirement for an Army in the Constitution as the founders feared a standing army. A Navy with a Marine fighting force could project power outward and was decided is the best form of defense of the United States.
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:39 am to Peazey
quote:
I read something a while ago that helped put our military spending into perspective for me. Mayne someone can correct me if this is a misconception, but it seems to make sense to me.
One of the biggest reasons that our military budget is so much larger than most country's budget is the fact that the standard of living in the US is so much higher than most of the World. American citizens expect to be paid more to be in the military than other country's citizens expect to be paid by their respective countries to be in their military. A lot of the extra cost we incur is personnel and pretty much unavoidable. Unless we want to start just outsourcing that too.
That's certainly a part of it. Strictly personnel parts (salary, healthcare, perks, education, etc.of the defense budget are about 30% of total defense spending.
Operations and maintenance - training, equipping, recruiting, transportation, facility and platform maintenance, etc., etc. - are another 40% or so of the budget.
R&D and procurement make up most of the rest of it with atomic defense taking a slice as well.
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:40 am to Poncho
specialization, different missions, different training requirements. Working in the bowels of a nuclear powered sub is completely different from camping out in the jungle or flying a high-altitude bomber. The marine corps exists as a group that can bridge these differences.
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:40 am to Darth_Vader
I doubt there is anything the Army/Navy/AF cannot do right now with the equipment they have that the Marines do. Yet, Marines are funded and deployed alongside the three branches, and do redundant jobs.
In all that redundancy, there has got to be money down the drain. Break them up into Navy and Army, and spread that training across the 3 military departments.
In all that redundancy, there has got to be money down the drain. Break them up into Navy and Army, and spread that training across the 3 military departments.
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:44 am to BoatSchoolTiger
quote:
You should try to read the US Constitution you were sworn to defend
Posted on 1/15/16 at 11:46 am to Poncho
The same justification I have for having a shotgun, a rifle and a pistol.
Different jobs, different tools.
Different jobs, different tools.
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News