Help support TMP


"Aircraft Carriers for the U.S. Coast Guard? -" Topic


12 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please do not use bad language on the forums.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2014-present) Message Board


Action Log

28 Aug 2015 8:01 p.m. PST
by Editor in Chief Bill

  • Removed from Modern Naval Discussion (1946 to 2005) board

Areas of Interest

Modern

Featured Hobby News Article


Top-Rated Ruleset

Beer and Pretzels Skirmish (BAPS)


Rating: gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star 


Featured Showcase Article

1:300 Ram V-1 Scout Car

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian equips his Israeli recon unit.


Featured Profile Article

Other Games at Council of Five Nations 2011

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian snapped some photos of games he didn't get a chance to play in at Council of Five Nations.


Featured Book Review


Featured Movie Review


1,280 hits since 12 Jul 2015
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Tango0112 Jul 2015 9:20 p.m. PST

" In the late 1980s and early 90s, the end of the Cold War began a trend that blurred policy delineations between the traditional spheres of national security, law enforcement, and humanitarian operations. Combined with the impact of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the U.S. Coast Guard has seen an evolution over the last three decades into a jack-of-all trades entity. It has grown in importance even as Congress has forced the "traditional" military services to take cuts in platforms and manpower capabilities.

Despite the temporary "recovery" seen by U.S. markets, the unspoken truth known by policymakers is that severe, long-term structural fiscal imbalances will plague America well into the future. By some estimates, in just five years the federal debt will be equal to 89 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) and in fifteen years, 127 percent. By OECD and IMF estimates, it already exceeds 100 percent of GDP.

It is therefore no accident that today's Pentagon has been seized by a mania of "jointness" and slogans like "One Team, One Fight" as civilian planners ultimately want to reduce redundancy of services and merge the Air Force, Army, Navy, and Marines into a single, hybridized force…"
Full article here
link

Amicalement
Armand

vicmagpa113 Jul 2015 3:05 a.m. PST

the federation forces begin! Where is the Excelsior?
beam me up scotty!

actualyy not a bad idea. However, managing multiple operations would require a streamlined chain of command.

will be interesting see how the uniform manufactuers take it.

Murvihill14 Jul 2015 9:44 a.m. PST

First of all, this guy is hawking a book, and there's no such thing as bad press. Second, form follows function. There are many smaller countries than the US and all of them divide their army and navy, primarily because the skill sets needed are so different. Any benefits to "jointness" would be more than overbalanced by waste. Even just merging the Coast Guard with the Navy would require sailors to learn things about law enforcement that the vast majority of them would never need to know.

Lion in the Stars14 Jul 2015 5:11 p.m. PST

Even just merging the Coast Guard with the Navy would require sailors to learn things about law enforcement that the vast majority of them would never need to know.

There's also this little thing called Posse Comitatus. The US Military is not permitted to do civilian law enforcement as a general rule.

Aleator22 Jul 2015 9:45 p.m. PST

The Army and Navy have Military Police personnel who have training in law enforcement which the vast majority of Army and Navy personnel don't. The Army has ocean-going ships whose personnel are trained to operate. The Navy have fighter and aircraft pilots just like the Air Force. The Marines have infantry, artillery and tank crewmen just like the Army. How is there less waste to have Army cooks, Navy cooks and Air Force cooks each going to different food service specialist schools?

David in Coffs23 Jul 2015 6:18 a.m. PST

I thought the marines had riflemen
Just some of them also flew aircraft or cooked in the galley

Murvihill23 Jul 2015 10:22 a.m. PST

If you're training 3 cooks, training all three of them in the same class provides you with economy of scale. If you're training hundreds of cooks at a time the economy of scale is such that you can tailor the training to the individual service. The equipment is vastly different between a field kitchen and galley and general training for self defense or damage control dictate different schools. Air Force probably uses contractors to cook.

As far as law enforcement goes, the military doesn't do it like civilians do. First, you are guilty unless you can prove yourself innocent. Second, your chain of command is involved with the process unless they recommend you for courts marshal (imagine your boss giving you a parking ticket). Things are different between shipboard and shoreside law enforcement as well; you can still be put on bread and water in the brig on a ship.

The services do share some training though, the Army does all parachute training (Fort Benning?).

Again, form follows function.

Lion in the Stars23 Jul 2015 11:31 a.m. PST

Actually, all the cooks go to the same school, on Ft Sam Houston.

Navy and Marine AZs (aviation administration personnel) went to the same school, IIRC.

Murvihill23 Jul 2015 2:03 p.m. PST

Looks like I'm about 20 years out of date…

By John 5422 Aug 2015 11:44 a.m. PST

Coastguard with Aircraft carriers? in a country where i saw a pool lifeguard with a revolver, anything is possible!
jesus…………….

John

Tango0122 Aug 2015 12:53 p.m. PST

(smile)

Amicalement
Armand

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.