Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bolstering the military
The Washington Times ^ | February 3, 2006 | Robert Scales

Posted on 02/10/2006 5:47:29 PM PST by neverdem

    Today the Quadrennial Defense Review hits the Beltway. While I don't agree with some of the provisions in the document, I was impressed with the commitment of the Defense Department to preserve substantively intact modernization of the ground services. This is a historical departure from the past when the Army and Marine Corps always arrived at the dispensing of materiel largess with hands out and expectations low.


    The second most expensive program within the DoD is the Army's Future Combat System. FCS is in fact a collection of many smaller systems, ranging from light armored vehicles to aerial drones and ground robots. The entire suite of technologies is tied together with an expansive information network. While the system is complex, its purpose is fairly simple: to elevate the Army into the third dimension. Experience in Iraq and Afghanistan reinforces the truism that ground forces will never be effective against an enemy who goes to ground in distant places unless they can lighten their weapons sufficiently to reach the battlefield and stay for the longer periods demanded by unconventional wars.


    The Army should be delighted. But a substantial and influential portion of the Army is not. A bit of history will explain. During the two decades between the world wars a few far-seeing admirals recognized that command of the seas would depend on the ability to command the air above the seas. Adms. Simms and Moffett fought a campaign inside the Navy and in the halls of Congress to build a fleet of large-deck aircraft carriers capable of destroying the Japanese fleet at a distance -- from the air. Before Pearl Harbor the "Battleship Barons" argued that carriers and aircraft were too vulnerable and battleships too invincible to be destroyed from the air. The Japanese would be defeated by...

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; US: District of Columbia; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: army; fcs; futurecombatsystem; iraq; qdr; transformation

1 posted on 02/10/2006 5:47:33 PM PST by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem
The QDR describes what "victory" in the GWOT will look like.
2 posted on 02/10/2006 5:54:44 PM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (Our enemies act on ecstatic revelations from their god. We act on the advice of lawyers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4

Thanks for the link.


3 posted on 02/10/2006 7:02:57 PM PST by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
A Long War
4 posted on 02/11/2006 12:00:06 AM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (Our enemies act on ecstatic revelations from their god. We act on the advice of lawyers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4

We didn't ask for it. So be it.


5 posted on 02/11/2006 12:59:51 AM PST by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
FCS is simply another attempt to find a technological fix for a human problem.
FCS is too expensive to be deployed. It depends on a large numbers of trained people to operate and maintain. It will be subject to breakdowns due to weather, terrain, and com-
bat wear and tear.
FCS has yet to demonstrate that it can put more boots on the ground patrolling through towns and villages, which are the places where combat in the 21st Century will take place.
More realistic choices would be to intensify the training of junior enlisted soldiers and NCO's, who are the people who will do the fighting.
End the mindless transfers of personnel every few years; when a soldier or an officer joins a unit, he should stay with that unit for most of his career.
If this hasn't been done already, the Army should expand the number of fire teams in a squad to four, the number of squads in a platoon to four, the number of platoons in a company to four; and the number of companies in a battalion to four. This would put more boots on the ground and force responsibility down to the lowest possible level.
The current leaders of the Army have the mindset of another devotee of technological fixes: Roger Smith, and his obsession with technology almost ruined another great institution: General Motors
6 posted on 02/11/2006 7:17:55 AM PST by quadrant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson