Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ducimus
You know, after WW2, the general thought was conventional wars was a thing of the past with the advent of atomic weaponry, and the new reality it presented. So they downsized and scaled the US armed forces to fit that view. A view which did not fit the requirements of the Korean war.
|
It wasn't the generals who downsized the army after WW2, it was the millions of men and women who rightfully wanted to go home after the job was done. You don't seriously think the Truman administration, or any other for that matter was going to say, "oh wait hold on, now that we've beat the Axis we
might have to fight the commies, so we're going to extend your enlistments for a few years. The American people just wouldn't have stood for it.
Quote:
We'll always need more boots on the ground. Given how many area's were acutally inivolved in. As for a draft, i'm split on that. On one hand , i feel it is EVERY CITIZENS duty to serve the country for 2 to 4 years. On the other hand, i dont want some dillweed watching my back who's some disgrunted ****head.
Personnally i dont think they're very far from a draft. If they've had to tap into the IRR, you can't scrape the manpower barrel any lower then that.
|
Actually the IRR is the top of the manpower barrel. They're already trained and quicker to prepare for duty than any civilian off the street.
I agree with you about a citizens duty, (i put in 7 years myself) and the military itself much prefers a volunteer over a draftee anyways, but that will always limit the size of the force that can be sustained.
Nukes aside, our military, unit for unit, is more powerful than it has been at any time in it's history. I don't see technology as being the entire answer to every concievable situation that crops up but it certainly helps the effectiveness of what troops the political and social climate provides.