Overhauling the United States Military: Name At Least Three Things That Should Be Changed?

Question

Name At Least Three Changes That Should Be Made To The United States Military. Anything That Would Improve Its Performance/Cpabilities and Explain Why You Believe These To Be Necessary?

-Thanks

Answer 1

I could spend a lot of time on this question but don't have that right now. I have to list one though... mental health resources. It has been in the news lately... for good reason.

My husband's debriefing after his 2nd tour in Iraq lasted 40 minutes. "40 MINUTES". Someone SERIOUSLY needs to explain that.

(He needed a 40 'day' debriefing in anger management, alone.)

He's actually one of the lucky ones, I shouldn't complain. One of my good friends lost her husband last year, 3 months after he returned from Iraq. Her 7 year old daughter found him in the shed after he hung himself.

Something HAS to be done to help our veterans and their families.

Answer 2

1. Larger ground forces, and I mean heavy forces. They are expensive, brutal on logistics and a freakin sledgehammer tactically but there simply is no substitute. There must be a large increase in overall troop levels as well, there is a war on; time to act like it. I would say 20-30 heavy divisions in the regular army and maybe 5-10 light/airborne type. As far as I know the US has the equipment to equip a lot more divisions than it currently has. A few of the divisions can be M1A2SEP, M2A3 and Paladins but M1A1 are ok too, also continue the upgrade from M1 to M1A2SEP. This will allow shorter tours(less combat stress reaction or PTSD if you prefer) and more time for refurbishment, training and reorganization of units etc.

2. Don’t kill programs and don’t order so few units! Always be looking for a replacement! The F-22 and B-2 bombers are good examples, the reduction of orders increases the cost per unit like crazy. Should be 1000 F-22 and 100 B-2 for sure. There should be a new tank in the pipe and IFV and helicopter and etc, this is important. Even if it is just done at a low funding level. A new IFV would be a great idea, a heavier one with armor protection comparable to the Abrams, room for 12 troops plus all their ammo and other stuff and perhaps a low velocity 180-200mm cannon. A heavier attack helicopter with more armor protection and payload would also be nice.

3. Low intensity warfare doctrine/policy (political stuff but hey it’s part of the equation). The gloves should be off, if a city is a constant problem like Ramadi or Falluja then it should be razed to the ground. Overwhelming force should always be used, the shock value is a force multiplier and means less death for all sides. Unlawful combatants should be treated as such. Put simply the gloves should be off, war is not nice and if you play nice you get hurt for your trouble. This would mean that military objectives and imperatives override any other consideration during wartime. Simple but it’s not easy.

Answer 3

Excellent question. First of all, all officers should be 'mustangs', enlisted first for at least one satisfactorily completed tour of service, ringknockers included. On the subject of officers, the 'up or out' system of careerism that is the current standard needs to be DXed, so as to not reward ticket-punching douche-bags who know how to say or do the right things with command authority. The promotion system should include recommendations from the led as well as the leaders, such as is done in the Israeli military, for both commissioned and non-commissioned officers.
Secondly, though this isn't really the second idea, get rid of the Pentagon. It's a large, old, expensive-to-maintain office building that forwards the cause of our security not at all, but does provides a convenient place for flag officers, Congressional pork-lovers and bagmen from Boeing and General Electric to get together, compare powerpoint presentations and plan more financial catastrophes like FCS, DDX 1000 and the JSF. Yes, I said it. Buying OV-10 Broncos has more to do with our current tactical reality than spending so much on what is already recognized as the last manned fighter program we will ever produce.
Since we're in what Rommel called 'cloud koo-koo land', I'll present the third idea, and that is to do away with the branches altogether. Does this make sense to anyone else; three sets of manuals for the same rifle or light machinegun system? Three separate Judge Advocate General corps? Separate procurement arms and different procedures across the services? Tradition is great, but so does making things streamlined and sensible so that people get the things they need to be effective without needless complications. The central idea that the troops serve is the same, and that is what matters.

Answer 4

In response to Chad....since you have no idea what your talking about why don't you keep your opinion to yourself. Yes, 232 years ago the Marine Corps was originally designed to defend ships from being boarded. Since then the mission statement has changed. But, obviously you haven't done your homework and wouldn't know that.

Clinton closed bases and cut back forces and that is the main reason we have long deployments and shortness of man power now. Chad wants to close more base? What an idiot.

To answer question:

1) Keep media out of combat. They only report blood and guts. They don't report facts and let people make up their own minds. When was the last time you saw news about the number of schools or medical facilities that we are building in Iraq?

2) When politicians like Ted Kennedy or celebrities like Jane Fonda commit treason. Prosecute them and sentence them accordingly.

3) Give politicians the same retirement plan and pay raises that military enlisted get. Put all military officers on this plan also. Bet funding would change real quick.

Answer 5

1. Less concentration on saving money. This has gotten a little ludicrious. Now you have to go through training on running the military like a business instead of a force. All based on the almighty dollar. I believe training is suffering and in turn - safety.

2. Expansion of Army and Marine Corps. Currently Navy and Air Force personnel are being taken out of their speciality and being sent to Iraq and Afganistan because the Army forces can not be sustained. Might I add they are being sent without proper training - even for supporting forces.

3. Training for jobs. Most if not all jobs are expected to be OJT. This sets up the soldier, sailor, airman or marine up for failure if the job skills are not quickly picked up. The reason for removal of training = refer to change 1.

Answer 6

1. Uncombined a lot of the military schools that was done in the 90's in order to "save" money but screwing training in the process, and to make it look like we had extra money to make the then "commander in chief" look good..."look a surplus.." baloney!
Re-institute the training pipelines for EACH disciplines in ALL branches of the military and you will see an improvement of the personnel and their training. Right now many dissimilar pipelines are combine and shortened to make do with the little money been spent on training compared to 20 years ago.

2. Double the size of the military to what it was in 1991!..the correct size, a result of the arms buildup of the 80's, which gave us the military that won the 91 war in weeks!!! today's military is TOO small!!!!!

3. Get the politically correctness AWAY from the military! we are fighters, not cocktail waiters!! If you can't handle rough language (for example) how in the hell can you handle someone trying to kill you and combat???????

Answer 7

1. Overhaul the system by which new weapons systems, communications systems, and other systems are tested and integrated into the military to ensure that the equipment is both up to date and reliable.

2. Find ways to better integrate, and coordinate the efforts of the different branches of the military, and the forces of our allies, for joint operations. Continually look for better ways to integrate a sound logistical plan into all operations.

3. Constantly work on ways to improve training.

Answer 8

1) Congress will have the authority to take away war funding if fraud is revealed, before or during hostilities.

2) Require universal conscription - where all young people would be required to serve, regardless of economic or social background. When some of our fat cats run the risk of losing their sons and daughters, maybe they'll think twice before supporting military adventures around the world.

3) Require veterans to keep government-issued rifles in their homes, as they do in Switzerland, for defense of the country in the event of an attack.

Answer 9

curiously, you could no longer call 4 the two, yet you could pass on an prolonged diatribe against the armed forces. i do no longer think we've bombed 4 countries interior the final 2 weeks, even with the reality that that is clever to have self assurance that we've used explosive munitions in the two Afghanistan or Iraq. by some ability i do no longer see common how you could equate keeping our hobbies to imperialism.

Answer 10

More support But you are the best in the world why change a thing I'm sure you know this 1 'yank=10 of any one else