That would never work. When we need them, we need them fast. Modern war is come-as-you-are. We are unlikely to get another WWII-like opportunity to gear up for war before heading overseas. We'd probably be better off with more actives and fewer reserves, who are very wasteful of peacetime dollars.
and they make up the majority of our military (reserves) by quite a good sized number if I'm not mistaken
Actually, studies have been done and the reserves can do the SAME job for far less. In fact, the reserves currently fight side by side with the active troops. Further, the reserves can deploy just as fast. Again, the services you need in place are Navy, Air Force and special forces.
Show me these studies, please. I cannot believe either of these statements. In each of our recent wars, the reserves have had to undergo much additioaln training to make them deployable. And still large numbers of undeployable soldiers were never used. Not even Israel, who makes better use of reserves than most, would consider eliminating active army units. No military power would ever consider it. We have a standing professional army that outclasses the conscripts used by most nations.
I have seen you trash the reserves a number of times Red, and you are simply bias for whatever reason. The reserves just just as skilled as evident by the 850,000 + that have deployed and fought since 9/11. The standards are not as they were PRE- 1990.... I am not sure what you think, but I assure you I work when I drill.. Further, the major budget item for services LIKE that Army is manpower. http://breakingdefense.com/2013/06/active-vs-guard-an-avoidable-pentagon-war/
I never said eliminate all active units. I said you have to specialize. The point is that, there is no need for the massive troop numbers we have. It is a waste as they are only glorified police. The technology we have is far more effective for the modern war in which we fight.
All I am saying is don't bitch about the defense budget when the biggest expense is people. (Not directed at anyone specifically, just people in general)
Well, what you stated was "The marines should be rolled to reserves only along with the Army forces." That means no active ground units. Our army is at its lowest personnel levels since before WWII. We are a superpower with global responsibilities and the world has not become any smaller. The waste is in weapons systems procurement, obsolete bases, and in maintaining large numbers of undeployable reservists. But I agree that this waste must be eliminated. It is indeed very effective. But airpower-only has only worked once in history--our 1991 air campaign against Yugoslavia. Airpower cannot hold territory Only infantry can do that. And they are far more than glorified police.
I said "excluding special forces". Not sure why you left that out. It would be far more effective to have a smaller elite ground force that the massive amounts of units we have running patrols in the middle east. Prove it. You keep saying this but have offered no evidence. It was true 20-30 years ago. Not today. They deploy just as effective and cost less.
