The problem with downsizing comes with the need to maintain a standing force of some size in order maintain readiness against future threats and conflicts that will inevitably come.

Since WWII has the United States ever been without an "enemy"? :nope:

An analysis in German language, which probably generally sees it correctly.

http://www.focus.de/politik/gastkolu...d_3644351.html

The author points out that we currently have seen the end of an era where military occupation of foreign countries pays off, and therefore the kind and way of modern warfare once again dramatically changes, and shifts its focus. This change , which also is due to changes in political paradigms on how to meet international opponents, allows the reduction of ground forces, and it is logical that parallel to the defence cuts some key branches of military competence, cyberwarfare for example, indeed will get boosted, not cut.

The author closes with expressing the hope that the Europeans can read the sign of times. It seems to me that they - and especially Germany - still have not realised that the conception of "nation building" and international "humanitarian interventions", has been buried in Iraq and Afghanistan. Even the Arab revolutions need to be learned some lessons from.

Ironically, I think, it is a bit like with political correctness wanting to educate the public to become better people of this or that manner - by forcing them via new laws. Laws do not educate a people to change themselves and their traditions, but it is the other way around: long-collected experiences and traditions, over millenia, influence in the formulation of moral codices and laws. Guess which of the two has the deeper, longer roots.

You mean since WW1, you know, the war that was supposed to end all wars.

Well technically we did get a couple of decades of relative peace between the world wars.

Lucky you...we went to Russia...and that went really well. :O:

We have numerous cold war bases that can be shut down....and placed on our southern border

That's what I'm saying. Get rid of pilot planes like the f22, f35, etc and other fighter planes, use missiles and lasers to defend against aircraft, use missiles and drones to attack enemy installations and troops. Using pilot planes reminds me of the insistence WWI generals had for house mounted cavalry and mass front line attacks against machine guns.

But drones aren't just some new weapon like a machine gun or a longbow Neal. Taking the human out of the equation does provide some advantages but it also introduces some pretty significant weaknesses too.

For one thing is the potential for an enemy to jam or hack the control signalling. That's a lot easier to do than stop a determined human pilot.

The way I figure it we'll need both drones and human piloted aircraft for a long time, maybe forever, lest we find our missiles and drones useless or worse co-opted used against us.

August,

that is why I expect the move towards autonomous drones being inevitably coming, for better or for worse. Problem will be that when everybody can build such drones with technological components build by anybody and bought from anybody (globalizations, spreading of hightech and knowhow), everybody can strike against everybody without ever being formally held responsible: states, criminal cartels, companies, angry billionaires.... A nightmare scenario.



Neal,

http://www.amazon.com/Kill-Decision-...=kill+decision

Autonomous drones meet insect swarm intelligence. Not pleasant. :D The novel is exciting, though Daemon and Darknet by the same author were even more so.

Possible I mentioned this book before, I am not certain.

Did someone say autonomous drones? Sorry, i couldn't resist. :O:

New air based drones to replace pilots!
http://www.foundation3d.com/uploads/...-25-978052.jpg

New ground based drones to replace troops!
http://www.movieprop.com/tvandmovie/...skeletons1.jpg

Well as the capability grows obviously so too will the countermeasures.

In the 70s there was a politician who demanded that the defense was abolished and replaced with a simple phone. This phone should have direct contact to the Kremlin and was in the event of a Soviet attack, saying that Denmark surrenders

Markus

I've been raising hell about the F-35 project for a couple years now. The amount of money that is being flooded into this project makes me sick. Its like buying a bugatti veyron that can go 400 KM/h when you dont have anywhere near the money to pay for it and you already have a perfectly good car thats going to last you into the near future. Just look at what Turkey has done. Their F-16s can blow the pants off of damn near any aircraft in production with the right pilot behind the stick. With the skill of our pilots and the cost efficiency of upgrading the F-16 fleet, we wont need anything near an F-35 or an F-22 for many decades to come. I mean, who are we trying to compete against? Space Aliens? Nobody in the world fields anything near the ridiculous F-35, so why are we so desperate to make it? Grotesque waste of money.

The day the Department of "Defense" actually lives up to its name is the day i become a billionaire superstar. We could literally field about 1/4 of the active duty servicemembers we have now and still be ready for any invasion. China, the biggest potential threat, couldnt dream of putting together the logistical capacity to invade mainland USA.

Be fair, the Americans took part in that futile adventure too.