Decrease Font Size Increase Font Size
Login

Military Photos



Current poll results


Is today's military stretched too thin to be effective?

Yes60 %60 %60 % 60.00 % (60)
No31 %31 %31 % 31.00 % (31)
I do not know6 %6 %6 % 6.00 % (6)
I have no opinion1 %1 %1 % 1.00 % (1)
Other, please list in comments2 %2 %2 % 2.00 % (2)

Total votes: 100
One vote is allowed per day

[ Voting booth | Other polls ]

Comments

Display Order
Re: Is today's military stretched too thin to be effective?
by Anonymous
on Jan 25, 2004
Depends on how many new fronts get opened up, by us or by others, no?

On the other hand, it'd be difficult to recall (as far as I know of) a nation which is as militarized as America is today... taking ALL police, military reserves & guard, militia, ROTC, security guards, hunters, law enforcement (like ATF, FBI etc.), intel gathering agencies, veteran organizations, customs, border patrol, private eyes, airport screeners, concealed carry permittees and ADDING them to the active duty Marines, Air, Coast Guard, Navy and Army... it makes for quite an enormous at-the-ready force. Push come to shove, and the right leader at that moment in time, my hunch is that we'd have more barrels pointed in the right direction than would truly be necessary... at least here at home.

And, as some have stated elsewhere, if they really need some help, they could just let us old fogey's re-up to handle the behind scenes duty and free up fighters.

Re: Is today's military stretched too thin to be effective?
by Anonymous
on Jan 26, 2004
There's something to be said for spreading forces, so long as there is an adequate supply line and the backfilling of deployed forces is maintained. Just as we preposition war-ready materiels in places like Diego Garcia for more rapid reaction, having troops in potential hot spots can, if used wisely in combat mobility mode, act as an enhancement to any quick reaction force. It can allow you to get there "Firstest with the mostest," as NB Forrest noted. And first with the most usually controls the field of battle.

Jake

Only logged in users are allowed to comment. register/log in
Military History
Forum Posts

Military Polls

Is America doing enough to address homeland security issues?

[ Results | Polls ]

Votes: 479

This Day in History
1813: Fifteen U.S. gunboats engage three British ships in Hampton Roads, VA.

1815: Trials of Fulton I, built by Robert Fulton, are completed in New York. This ship would become the Navy's first steam-driven warship.

1862: Union gunboats occupied the Stono River above Cole's Island, South Carolina, and shelled Confederate positions there.

1863: A heavy combined Army-Navy bombardment of Vicksburg, lasting 6 hours, hammered Confederate positions.

1864: General John Bell Hood's Confederate force attack William T. Sherman's troops outside of Atlanta, Georgia, but are repulsed with heavy losses.

1864: Side-wheelers U.S.S. Morse, Lieutenant Commander Babcock, and U.S.S. Cactus, Acting Master Newell Graham, dislodged Confederate batteries which had opened fire on Army supply wagon trains near White House, Virginia.

1866: 50 Marines and Sailors landed at new Chwang, China, to assure punishment for those who attacked an American official.

1881: Five years after General George A. Custer's infamous defeat at the Battle of Little Bighorn, Hunkpapa Teton Sioux leader Sitting Bull surrenders to the U.S. Army, which promises amnesty for him and his followers.

1898: During the Spanish-American War on the way to the Philippines to fight the Spanish, the U.S. Navy cruiser Charleston seized the island of Guam.

1900: Chinese begin siege of foreigners in Beijing. Military delegations in the “Foreign Quarter” including the US Marine delegation band together to defend their charges.