No I think we all have come to that conclusion. His theories are so far fetched I have trouble understand how anyone could even justify such ideas.

 

haha yea. its kinda funny in a way.

 

In a sadistic, insane, crazy way absolutely.

 

Yes, that was certainly true back then... nowadays, that's not the case. The US Army's inventory of amphibious assault vehicles ... lacks. Yes, the US Army has amphibious equipment, but that's not their role anymore. As I said, doctrine changes and evolves. In fact, aside from the Soviet/Chinese superiority in artillery pieces (they have more, and they shoot bigger rounds farther than we do), the US Army has the best assets on the battlefield: M1A1 Abrams, A6 Palladins, Strikers, Longbow Apaches (death to any armor unit on the battlefield). With the close air support the Army Air Corp.. excuse me, the US Air Force provides in the form of A10s, Spectre gunships (Puff the Magic Dragon!), F16s, etc., the US, with a smaller force, can be quite effective on the battlefield. HOWEVER, they are not equipped for an amphibious assault the way the Marines are.

Which brings up an interesting question... is there ever really going to be a need for an amphibious assault on such a massive scale as D-Day anymore? With the amount and accuracy of firepower the US Navy possesses, and with the US expecting to establish air superiority within the first 24 hours of conflict (the USAF, USN, and Marine aviation has THE world's best toys to conduct war with), is there a need for large-scale amphibious assaults? I don't think so, but that's my opinion. The way the US fights a war has changed and evolved, and the enemy has changed and evolved. As I said, nowadays, the Marines do more duty as RDF than anything else.

I've already seen major shifts in doctrine since I enlisted in 1991, and I expect it to change more. Your point is valid as a historical example, but I don't think it's as relevent today as it was 60 years ago.

 

Point taken and in the respect of today's Army, you are absolutely right. The Army is not equipped to take on a large scale amphibious assault. I don't think there will ever be one again on today's battlefield. I could see the USN and USAF bombing a beach front into submission and having a small group of SOCOM guys taking a beach but that's about the most I would expect. If I were President today I would downsize the military even more and with the cost savings I create more Spec. Ops units. With those I'd create a military that knows nothing but an ability to mass firepower and tactical maneauver abiliity with surgical proficency. (i.e. laser guided bombs to prep a target, UAR birds to watch and then HALO troops onto it with extraction already en route). Let the enemy know that not only are that not safe from the air but that their door can get kicked in at any time. Anyway, I have digressed from my point. War has changed and so have we.

 

LMFAO!!!! well I honestly cant believe you said that!

Well, if you ever come in contact with an enemy... I hope thier kind enough to fight how "you" like it...

Even though I hate your guts, I give you prop's for "following your dream." and protecting your country. Good luck with that!!

-Fatal

 

On a serious note, what did he do to make you hate him?

 

The kid asked for an opinion, so he got one.

Or do you want it to be like the Bush admin and deny anything and everything thats too long for them to read.

 

.. did you even read that crock that was posted?

I mean, come on... a honest opinion is one thing, but a propoganda piece interlaced with outright falsehoods and conspiracy theory language like:

"assuming that we get rid of the satanic infiltrators at the highest echelons of military command."

"The fascist element is far more transparent today and the amalgamation of US military personnel with 'private' security contractors, as seen in Iraq, is making it obvious to even the densest jar head that the US military is no longer in the business of 'securing the peace' or 'winning freedom' for oppressed people."

is something else. That's not an opinion based on solid reasoning or undertsanding, it's an opinion based on rhetoric. He "served for 4 years in the 1960s," and so it's supposed to be credible? Please. He hasn't "been there".

 

My dad is a marine and he is bad ***. I vote marines.

 

Go become a cop first - in a prison system (being around men that are plotting against you), then if you like that type of lifestyle............... then go join the Marines!

 

Dude you are young... do it right, go through OCS and actually benefit from being in the military.
Infantry is a dead end, you make $18K/year, are the most likely to get killed, and the least qualified to do anything when you get out.
Be an officer... invest in your future

 

I'm an infantry officer. I have been offered jobs from everywhere from hotel chains to investment firms. The military creates leaders that are taught things you could never imagine in a board room. And most importantly you get paid to serve your country, hang out with your friends and TEAR **** UP!!!!

 

Investment firms are offering you what type of position with their company? Are you on your way out of the military at this time, is this why you are being offered jobs?

 

Officers have all the training necessary to be managers, since as an company grade officer, your job is to manage personnel and materiel, and as a field grade officer, you train to handle higher levels of management. Companies like seeing military experience, because they expect the candidate to have discipline and leadership training, things they want but won't necessarily pay for to get their employees the very same type of training. As an added bonus, because most officers require a security clearance at some point in their careers, companies that require a security clearance won't need to pony up for the initial investigation if the candidate already has a clearance.

To become an officer, a person MUST have a college degree. To make Captain, that degree must be a four year degree. To make Lieutenant Colonel, you must have a graduate degree. Companies generally feel that military experience, especially officer experience, means they are more than likely getting a candidate that already has proven him/herself as a capable leader, can handle being personally responsible for millions of dollars in equipment, can manage medium to large numbers of personnel, and can focus on getting results.