Thoughts on military budget cuts

[patrick1]

Clarence, Im not crazy about the USAF landing on carriers and stuff.  Marine Corps and Naval Aviation have proved themselves quite capable and I think this really isn't an area with potentially large savings potential.  I also think there could be detrimental effect on espirit de corps and communication. 

The big area of savings from my view is always procurement.  I think there have been improvements in multi service programs (eg. UH60) but cutting un-necessary pet programs and really de-politicizing the bidding process will save money.  We also have to cut our commitments and bases overseas.

[patrick1]

I can see your points. Streamlining certain things can certainly have good benefits. However, I think cross service coordination works better than full compartmentalization. From everything I have read and talking to active duty people, I think the various regional (i.e. CENTCOM) or mission capable specific (SOCOM) commands have been excellent and the various services work well together.  The full compartmentalization can also lead to problems and rivalries-some services can become too powerful.  This happened after WWII when the USAF basically wanted to gut the Navy and the Marine Corps had to fight for its life.

[patrick1]

I think the quote was from Secretary Forrestal.  The sentiment didnt last that long though because they did have to raise hell in Congress after WWII to avoid chopping block.

I think the USMC offers a unique mix of skill sets under one branch. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_Air-Ground_Task_Force

They are still much more deployable and nimble than the Army but you are correct though that some of the less kinetic actions simply did not call for the USMC.  A lot of missions in Iraq called for Army MP's but we were there so long that they had to be rotated in into a role they werent best equipped for.  Im admittedly a dilettante in the field though so Ill leave it at that for now.