"Status of American Military" Topic

In the Ukraine War thread TMP link
there were people asserting that the US military has markedly declined over the last 18 months.

I feel that the discussion of the Ukraine War should be separate and pertain to the actual conflict, but the question (that I am paraphrasing) came up on basically what makes people think that. Is that truly the case?

I honestly believe that the question is really more complicated that the initial off the cuff pronouncements in that thread. First off, the US military is likely still the most powerful military in the world by a large margin. But the question was asked about what makes people think that, and I do agree that the US military has declined over recent years, even though it remains miles ahead of peers.

While I agree that there is too much focus on climate, race and the notions of equity in the current military, in a military that has a culture of having officers examine just about anything out there to justify their jobs, it alone isn't enough for me to say it is a causal factor in US military decline.

Still, something is off in the military and as a one time Cold War Naval Intelligence analyst, I decided to look at it like I would have looked at it back in the 1980s.

My focus was Naval and Air Forces, so, despite having a strong interest in land forces, I don't feel qualified to really comment on Army and Marine ground force status.

However, looking at the Navy first, things look troubling.

Back in the 1980s we saw cracks in the Soviet military and wondered if they were on the brink of collapse. Nobody really called it, but many suspected (and honestly hoped for) it. One of the major factors that came up in judging the Soviet fleet readiness was basic upkeep. In the late 1980s, the Russians simply weren't spending enough money or effort on basic ship upkeep and it showed. Too much rust and painted over rust and multiple layers of paint to the point where hatches were essentially painted shut pointed to issues with the Soviet Navy.

Look at the US Navy in late 2021…
link

Rust isn't a budget issue. It's a resources allocation issue. Back in the 1980s, if you weren't working on your primary job, you were chipping and painting. Chief Petty Officers made sure of this. I am not saying there was no rust back then, there certainly was, but if the CPOs I worked with saw the above pictures, they'd be putting boots up behinds (right after taking the XO's boot out of their own behinds). It was a basic pride issue and a basic operating issue. When we saw Soviet ships starting to rust over in the 1980s (more than the standard rust that pops up from time to time) the people I worked with and I went 'hmmmmmmm.'

I look at the countless rusty pictures of US Naval ships today (and the frankly unbelievable excuses I am seeing for them) and I think, 'hmmmmmmm.'

The next issue I see is Air Force readiness levels. Here is the report from 2021 on readiness levels.

link

In this case I think it is too few planes being flown too many hours. So maybe I'm giving the Air Force guys more cover than I am my former service, but on an at sea ship you have a lot more time to kill (and no where else to go), so I am less inclined to accept the excuses for the Navy.

But I look at reports of Air Force readiness, and look at flight hours per airframe and I go 'hmmmm.'

So, while I am not ready to count the US Military out of any straight up fight, I am concerned by real world factors.

It would seem to me that what we really need are no nonsense military leaders who leave the (non directly military) politics to the politicians while putting in a bottom up attitude to focus on fundamentals in place. This status needs to change.

I honestly don't care if the president is at fault or not. That is a side show to the main issue. The people whose jobs are to be above that fray are not doing their jobs and need to wake up.

That's the way I see it. Feel free to disagree.

Sounds more reasonable to me than most criticisms. Thanks for the viewpoint.

Thanks. Any comparative numbers on accidental collisions? We seem to have a lot of ships running into each other, or things. That happens:I had a hs buddy who was a seaman on a destroyer that ran into a coral reef or something: three top officers got cashiered over it. 1970 or thereabouts. But is it worse now?

Back in the 80s the Navy used lead based, high VOCs paints that any sailor could use. Also, Bosun Mates were responsible for topside preservation during deployments and were trained how to do it.

Due to environment concerns painting has gotten a lot harder with limits on Sand blasting in yards, the use of low VOC two-part polysiloxane paints that must be sprayed, and a shift to each department being responsible for topside preservation of its gear and associated deck area. They do not teach Sailors how to do it in bootcamp anymore and your average non-bosun does not know how to do that type of work.

I talked to a Cruiser skipper in Japan who told me that his concern was tactical readiness vice cosmetic material readiness.

The Navy has a program called CCAT (Corrosion Control Assistance Teams) to train Sailors how to chip and paint, but enlisted turn-over rates make it a never ending battle to train the new Sailors.

The net is we have a lot of rusty ships, but I don't know if it the indicates what you posit about readiness. That said, I worry more about Optempo, having enough missiles, and other factors.

First off, the US military is likely still the most powerful military in the world by a large margin.

Yes that is pretty much a fact …

But the question was asked about what makes people think that, and I do agree that the US military has declined over recent years, even though it remains miles ahead of peers.

Agreed …

While I agree that there is too much focus on climate, race and the notions of equity in the current military, in a military that has a culture of having officers examine just about anything out there to justify their jobs, it alone isn't enough for me to say it is a causal factor in US military decline.

As I have said before I was on active duty '79-'90. I was a Rifle & Mortar Plt Ldr and Bn Air Ops Officer in the 101. Then later an M113 Mech Co Cdr., with a Mech Hvy Bde of the 18th ABN Corps. I can say this, being a former Infantry officer, any time that is taken away from real warfighting skills, combat prep, etc. Does affect combat readiness.

Still, something is off in the military

Yes … very much so. Things like this e.g. – climate, CRT, equity, diversity, inclusion, etc. Have no place in creating a combat read force, based on my training & experience plus decades of the study of history. Even though it was in my long-passed youth.

I don't feel qualified to really comment on Army and Marine ground force status.

Well I feel I do have a working knowledge of the topic of ground combat units … Yes I was a grad of USMC Basic Amph Training and operated with them a number of times. I'm not a Marine though, just an Army Grunt. With a lot of time on field ops, etc. As I pointed out already … somethings get in the way of real training of combat. E.g. this SJW, woke, etc. agenda, etc.,

Plus I'm not the only one who believes that money that should be spent on defense. Was spent on illegal aliens, Going Green, CRT, etc. None of those will assist to make us a combat ready, IMO …

Don't dismiss capable, real leadership in our elected & appointed officials.

I think the huge advantages the U.S. military has are the following:
1) Masters of logistics-can support operations anywhere on the planet.
2) Operational training-continuous exercises and training, which while are probably pretty expensive, allow units to practice combined arms operations.
3). The ability to spend like there's no tomorrow on weapons systems.
4) Integrated satellite/drone/intelligence gathering assets that provide a clear picture of the battlefield, possible threat envelopes, and then have the technology to defeat those threats.

All of those things combined is a massive advantage over other countries. Now that's not saying that there aren't issues with today's recruits, the procurement system, etc., but on the battlefield no one else comes close…for now.

The US Military can only perform as well as its leadership allows it to. At present the US military is dominated by political generals and hill climbers who will say or do anything to get the current Admins approval and gain position -- and the lucrative defense contractor "Board" positions when they retire. The US military in that regard is like France in WW2. Fine equipment, many fine troops --execrable leadership.

This is what the White House spends its time on during a major European war crisis…

White House moves to fight climate ‘denialism' amid calls to end fossil-fuel crackdown
Roundtable discussion focuses on countering climate 'disinformation'

link

SB, I will go out on a limb here and say this is not the main focus at the WH right now. And I am guessing that the main focus of the Washington Times, circulation 60,000, a small right wing political newspaper, is not the war in Europe either.

You may know which generals are dominating the military and what their credentials are. Or where the vision for this training has come from. I do not agree with it either and it hurts our focus. But are we finished as a fighting force because we have execrable leaders? Who exactly are these guys?

I would still say we are in better shape than any other military. We have had any number of training initiatives over the years that were not good ideas. Sail drills for steam warships anyone? Cavalry drills for WW1 in 1917? I think the woke stuff will subside as well.

All of those things combined is a massive advantage over other countries. Now that's not saying that there aren't issues with today's recruits, the procurement system, etc., but on the battlefield no one else comes close…for now.

Agreed …

The US Military can only perform as well as its leadership allows it to.

Yes we have to follow legal orders … no matter how stupid they are or the people who gave them to us …

Okay, who are the Execrables? I am serious. Which generals are responsible for this training? . Please don't just keep saying POTUS, or the buck stops with him. This goes back a couple of years at least. What data drove these changes? Where does army training originate?

I am familiar with stupid orders, have been given many, labeled insubordinate. I did not do stupid well. Apparently I would be in the same trouble in the army today.

There are a number of Generals, etc., responsible for training in a number of different Commands. Training & Doctrine Command being the primary one. Where much of the Army training originates. The changes were driven by the additional topics as I have mentioned that have nothing to do with combat training, readiness, etc.

Plus you have an Army that just fought 20 years of COIN. They will need to do a little rebuilding. And start training for conventional again, etc., as well. But the un-needed woke, etc., training interferes with all that.

Don't know about the Army, but very familiar with 2022 training requirements for US Navy and DoN civilians. This year its the standard stuff again: Cyber Awareness, Active Shooter, Sexual Assault Prevention, Counter Intelligence, etc. Including some administrative stuff. There is not any training dedicated to "climate, CRT, equity, diversity, inclusion".

I will point out that any localised flooding is a huge deal for most Naval facilities due to water proximity. I know the Washington Navy yard has flooded twice during my career.

The only training I had along the lines discussed was a one time flag led discussion on implementing lifting the ban on homosexual service members. It was mostly focused on helping Sailors keep from running afoul of the new law.

The Navy has issues, but idealogical agendas by senior leadership are not the cause. Instead it's wrestling with things like recruitment, retention, fuel costs, maintenance, new ship construction, ship / weapon designs, acquisition, weapons inventires, Optemo, Perstempo, great Power strategies, joint / allied integration, etc.

Thanks LostPict, very interesting stuff.

A visit to TRADOC was interesting also, thanks Legion. I would need a lot more time there to get a sense of the nature and scope of training related to "woke" topics, did not see anything.

I did find a climate topic which references findings by the Army War College. I inferred from some of the language that the War College is responsible for the training curriculum for this topic.

I found a specific training topic related to the impact of extreme climate conditions on installation security. This did not seem unusual, since data shows that extreme weather events are substantially more common in recent years. However, there are indications that a climate change doctrine is taking shape via War College findings. Given the resources and data available on this topic, this does not seem crazy to at least consider.

Will have another look sometime.

So…news today the US Army is running its troops through a transgender sensitivity program. Yep, that'll keep Putin at bay!!

While Russia wages a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the U.S. Army is putting its soldiers through training on gender pronouns and coaching officers on when to offer soldiers gender transition surgery, according to an official military presentation on the subject obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

The mandatory presentation, "Policy on the Military Service of Transgender Persons and Persons with Gender Dysphoria," was given to officers earlier this month along with instructions for them to train their subordinates on the material. Portions of the presentation were provided to the Free Beacon by a whistleblower who was ordered to undergo the training as a high-ranking officer in the Army Special Forces.

link

Ok I'll open a can of worms. With the way things seem to be going, maybe it's time to reconstitute the draft. 2 years mandatory training, men and women. No College exemption. Then reserve for so many years. If you are not a citizen, volunteer for 8 years and automatic citizenship. We are going to need a trained army. Also will give the College kids something real to be concerned about. Told you this is a can of worms. 😉

Yep. But think of what that also means in the face of a dogma being enforced upon enlistees that looks like this:

Book burning 🔥😉

Jeez!!!!