- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
Posted on 2/24/14 at 5:12 pm to Eurocat
Good.
We need to mantain our navy as the strongest in the world and that would be about 15 or 16 aircraft carrier battle groups. We need a strong and moderately sized air force. And the army needs to be trimmed down a lot to an acceptable level of combat worthiness and effectiveness.
The future is in a large and poweful navy, a robust air force, a very lethal and quick striking spec ops branch with delta force and navy seals and a effective army to supplement all of the above.
Having an outlandishly large army.... that model of defense is a thing of the past and outdated and obsolete.
We need to mantain our navy as the strongest in the world and that would be about 15 or 16 aircraft carrier battle groups. We need a strong and moderately sized air force. And the army needs to be trimmed down a lot to an acceptable level of combat worthiness and effectiveness.
The future is in a large and poweful navy, a robust air force, a very lethal and quick striking spec ops branch with delta force and navy seals and a effective army to supplement all of the above.
Having an outlandishly large army.... that model of defense is a thing of the past and outdated and obsolete.
This post was edited on 2/24/14 at 5:18 pm
Posted on 2/24/14 at 5:13 pm to asurob1
quote:
I was stationed on an aircraft carrier out of San Diego in the 80s. Our maximum deployment time was 6 months. That did not include sea trials, quals, and the random rimpac or exercises off of Korea. 1988 in fact still did not exist for me as I was at sea for 11 months that year.
It is amusing how many people think that ships deploy for 6 months ... and then come back to home port ... and everyone does nothing for the next 18 until the next deployment.
Deployment is the easy part. Typically, the 3-6 months leading up to it can be pure hell.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 5:15 pm to Sentrius
quote:
We netours mantain our navy as the strongest in the world and that would be about 15 or 16 aircraft carrier battle groups. We need a strong and moderately sized air force. And the army needs to be trimmed down a lot to an acceptable level of combat worthiness and effectiveness.
The future is in a large and poweful navy, a robust air force, a very lethal and quick striking spec ops branch with delta force and navy seals and a effective army to supplement all of the above.
Having an outlandishly large army.... that model of defense is a thing of the past and outdated and obsolete.
Exactly. And raising a large land army is relatively a lot quicker and easier than raising a Navy.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 5:15 pm to son of arlo
quote:
It has become a little too attractive to join and stay in the military.
Please edumacate me further on your assertion.
There's nothing to really expand on.
In a competitive private job market, the military has really become a comfortable safe haven, an attractive career choice with great benefits, decent pay, in some cases great pay.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 5:48 pm to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
In a competitive private job market, the military has really become a comfortable safe haven, an attractive career choice with great benefits, decent pay, in some cases great pay.
Maybe for pencil pushers and shoe clerks, but the guys who are at the tippy, tiny point of the sword don't really care about the pay that much. Like my good buddy at FU always says, we would have flown those jets for beer money.
Right now the USAF is offering massive bonuses to retain pilots. If what you assert is correct, why should the USAF do that?
My oldest son did two tours in the sandbox. We had a heart-to-heart and he said, "Dad, there's no future in this." I fully supported him separating from the military. The military has become a toy, and don't think for a minute they don't realize it.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 5:56 pm to son of arlo
quote:
Right now the USAF is offering massive bonuses to retain pilots. If what you assert is correct, why should the USAF do that?
I thought they'd fly those jets for beer money?
quote:
"Dad, there's no future in this."
For him, there may not be a future, and he wants to do something else. For others, it's a stable job that offers a great benefit package and solid pay. The thought of going out on their own and losing that security is not appealing.
This post was edited on 2/24/14 at 5:57 pm
Posted on 2/24/14 at 6:02 pm to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
I thought they'd fly those jets for beer money?
The USAF doesn't have real pilots.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 6:14 pm to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
I thought they'd fly those jets for beer money?
They're not getting to fly the jets. When I was AD, I usually flew 30 sorties a month. These days pilots are flying 1 or 2 per month, and tack on 3 year staff tours in between tours in an operations squadron.
quote:
For him, there may not be a future, and he wants to do something else. For others, it's a stable job that offers a great benefit package and solid pay. The thought of going out on their own and losing that security is not appealing.
I'd agree for REMFs. Not so much for the warriors.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 6:15 pm to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
For others, it's a stable job that offers a great benefit package and solid pay. The thought of going out on their own and losing that security is not appealing.
Even with the risks, it can be a great career. I agree.
This post was edited on 2/24/14 at 6:19 pm
Posted on 2/24/14 at 6:22 pm to Porky
Have you seen the new National Defense Strategy or Quaddrenial Defense Review?
Yeah, me neither...
But let's just gut the shite our of the armed forces in manpower and budget without adjusting the global policy gameplan.
Cart The horse
Yeah, me neither...
But let's just gut the shite our of the armed forces in manpower and budget without adjusting the global policy gameplan.
Cart The horse
Posted on 2/24/14 at 6:27 pm to NWarty
Let's just get rid of the US military, and then we'll have peace on Earth.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 6:29 pm to NWarty
quote:
Have you seen the new National Defense Strategy or Quaddrenial Defense Review?
Yeah, me neither...
This post was edited on 2/24/14 at 6:55 pm
Posted on 2/24/14 at 6:29 pm to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
In a competitive private job market, the military has really become a comfortable safe haven, an attractive career choice with great benefits, decent pay, in some cases great pay.
So much fricking ignorance if this is intended to be a blanket statement.
Acts as if absolutely anyone off the street can sign up for any service, coast through 20 with nothing but promotions, R&R, and good times.
Well ... it's not exactly like that. Maybe for a few here and there ... but not for the masses.
Stability? yeah .... if you say so.
I left active duty for the private sector in the hopes of having stability, and God willing, raising a family.
Three weeks after child #2 was born ... got recalled for 365 BOG in Baghdad. Bye bye honey ... bye bye kids ... see ya ... well, maybe never ... but, hey ... good times while it lasted. If I do come back ... hope y'all haven't dragged up.
Does that sound comfortable and stable to you?
And ... another thing ... hint: there is a reason why ex-Officers and ex-Military are typically sought after in the private sector.
So GTFO out here with that shite.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 6:40 pm to navy
quote:
Stability? yeah .... if you say so
Nothing says "stability" like a military career.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 6:50 pm to Sentrius
quote:
Good.
We need to mantain our navy as the strongest in the world and that would be about 15 or 16 aircraft carrier battle groups. We need a strong and moderately sized air force. And the army needs to be trimmed down a lot to an acceptable level of combat worthiness and effectiveness.
The future is in a large and poweful navy, a robust air force, a very lethal and quick striking spec ops branch with delta force and navy seals and a effective army to supplement all of the above.
Having an outlandishly large army.... that model of defense is a thing of the past and outdated and obsolete.
Holy balls, we agree on something.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 6:51 pm to navy
quote:
Deployment is the easy part. Typically, the 3-6 months leading up to it can be pure hell.
yup.
I can't fathom how bad it is for the guys now that the typical deployment is 8 to 9 months. You kill retention rates...
Posted on 2/24/14 at 6:55 pm to navy
quote:
And ... another thing ... hint: there is a reason why ex-Officers and ex-Military are typically sought after in the private sector.
So GTFO out here with that shite.
yup.
I hired a former navy meteorologist for one of my openings last month. The kid was not remotely qualified for the position.
He is the best of my four employees at the position.
Learns quickly, great attitude, and only bitches when he is happy.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 6:57 pm to asurob1
quote:
and only bitches when he is happy.
That is definitely a military trait.
"If your men aren't bitching then you're doing something wrong."
Sun Tzu
Not really, I don't think he said that. But he should have.
Posted on 2/24/14 at 6:58 pm to Sentrius
quote:
Sentrius
I don't agree with you on hardly anything but at least you aren't one these people who constantly bitch about the size of government then complain when military cuts are on the table.
Popular
Back to top


0





