Its time. Congress and the President are about to start debating how to avoid the "Fiscal Cliff" so lets take a look at what I think are the worst case scenarios for the services...
First up is the Army.
The Army Chief of Staff can try and avoid the inevitable...he can try and team with the Marines and SOCOM on a Land Power Study Group or whatever he calls it but when a former Army Officer from a powerful Democrat Think Tank says that the Army is going to be the bill payer for the move to the Pacific then all bets are off. Andrew Krepinevich, director of the Center for Strategic and Budget Assessments has specifically targeted Army Heavy and Mech Brigades for cuts. OUCH!
1. Ground Combat Vehicle. Toast. It ain't gonna happen.
2. Improved Carbine. Toast. They won't be able to justify it.
3. Increased Aviation. Good to go. Especially since it can be seen as contributing to disaster relief.
4. More UAVs. Unknown. If Congress gets to the point of actually asking serious questions about the utility of the airplanes, range limitations and utility over the Pacific then I can see the massive buy getting scaled back.
5. End Strength. Toast. They're gonna take a bigger hit than currently planned.
Next the Navy.
One of the big winners in the turn to the Pacific. Its ironic too. The Air-Sea Battle was a USAF initiative designed (in my opinion) to ensure that they would be in a position to rebuild there force after they saw it basically ignored during the war on terror. The irony continues because the Navy and Air Force have been competitors of a sort in the past. Budget wars make strange bedfellows.
1. LCS. Not toast but not clear either. The Navy will be asked to justify the concept. They won't be able to and they'll be forced to offer up the LCS to the budget Gods.
2. F-35C. No one is buying it but the Navy. The USMC is having it forced on it but they don't want it and neither does the Navy (or so it seems). No protection from allied buyers. A skeptical Navy and budget hawks to be appeased mean that this will be the easiest kill the F-35 will ever suffer.
3. The Carriers. Sketchy at best. I can easily see the Navy being forced to go for an extended period with 10 carriers. The debate where the President made the flippant remark about sea power shows that expanding or even maintaining the fleet is not an option.
4. End Strength. Fewer ships will drive a smaller Navy. They're going to take a hit numbers wise that they're probably not expecting.
That's a quick rundown on the Army and Navy. The Marine Corps and Air Force comes later today.
First up is the Army.
The Army Chief of Staff can try and avoid the inevitable...he can try and team with the Marines and SOCOM on a Land Power Study Group or whatever he calls it but when a former Army Officer from a powerful Democrat Think Tank says that the Army is going to be the bill payer for the move to the Pacific then all bets are off. Andrew Krepinevich, director of the Center for Strategic and Budget Assessments has specifically targeted Army Heavy and Mech Brigades for cuts. OUCH!
1. Ground Combat Vehicle. Toast. It ain't gonna happen.
2. Improved Carbine. Toast. They won't be able to justify it.
3. Increased Aviation. Good to go. Especially since it can be seen as contributing to disaster relief.
4. More UAVs. Unknown. If Congress gets to the point of actually asking serious questions about the utility of the airplanes, range limitations and utility over the Pacific then I can see the massive buy getting scaled back.
5. End Strength. Toast. They're gonna take a bigger hit than currently planned.
One of the big winners in the turn to the Pacific. Its ironic too. The Air-Sea Battle was a USAF initiative designed (in my opinion) to ensure that they would be in a position to rebuild there force after they saw it basically ignored during the war on terror. The irony continues because the Navy and Air Force have been competitors of a sort in the past. Budget wars make strange bedfellows.
1. LCS. Not toast but not clear either. The Navy will be asked to justify the concept. They won't be able to and they'll be forced to offer up the LCS to the budget Gods.
2. F-35C. No one is buying it but the Navy. The USMC is having it forced on it but they don't want it and neither does the Navy (or so it seems). No protection from allied buyers. A skeptical Navy and budget hawks to be appeased mean that this will be the easiest kill the F-35 will ever suffer.
3. The Carriers. Sketchy at best. I can easily see the Navy being forced to go for an extended period with 10 carriers. The debate where the President made the flippant remark about sea power shows that expanding or even maintaining the fleet is not an option.
4. End Strength. Fewer ships will drive a smaller Navy. They're going to take a hit numbers wise that they're probably not expecting.
That's a quick rundown on the Army and Navy. The Marine Corps and Air Force comes later today.
'Like past enemies, from the Chinese forces in Korea to the North Vietnamese Army to the Iraqi insurgents, [Gen]Scales, ret., argued, future foes will avoid confronting US air and sea superiority. Instead, they'll seek to draw us into protracted ground wars, where armored vehicles are our troops' best protection. Since World War II, "we've never run out of fighter planes, we've never run out of ships; we've always, always run out of infantry," Scales said. "Nothing substitutes for mass and the ability to achieve decisive effects on land."'
ReplyDeleteScales has a point. Why would the enemy play to our strengths?
Of course, with the PLAN's building plan, they'll outnumber us in 50 years.
I agree, but why get drawn into protracted ground wars? It takes a lot less time to train a grunt than pilots. It takes a lot less time to equip grunts than it takes to build ships, planes, etc. But, there is no reason why our guys should not have armored vehicles. IMO all our infantry should be mechanized to some point be it heavy or Stryker - even the airborne. That does not mean every infantry brigade gets its own equip, but equiped on a rotational basis.
ReplyDeleteAre you still gonna comment on sequestration and what the Corps and Air Force might cut? Looking forward to it.
gute
yeah but i got side tracked on some other stuff.
Delete