Chief: The Army has to start preparing for 'the big war'

Please do not forget that the pinheads in Washington have to let the soldiers use the new and better whatever’s to win

MSG Reid Zohfeld - I like that appellation - "pinheads in Washington."

I'll tweak that a little... some of those "pinheads" don't "let" they often FORCE the DOD to take on equipment we don't want, in order (apparently) to line constituent companies with pork-barrel contracts.

Going to have to disagree with you on this one Sir. It's not as simple as comparing our military *spending* to the Chinese to determine military *power.* How much money do the Saudis spend on their military vis a vis the Iranians? It's almost an order of magnitude more and yet the Iranians would likely obliterate Saudi in a straight up war without U.S. intervention. That said, money is correlated with military power, but it is just one of many variables.

Particularly if you consider a few additional data points:
1. Our resources are spread across multiple mission sets, China's budget is not. China spends most (all?) of its military budget specifically to counter our military and capabilities. Since 2001, we spend a significant portion of our budget on counter terrorism and stability operations and have neglected our conventional training, assets, and capabilities.
2. China has significant competitive advantages in both manufacturing, espionage, and overhead costs. Since China is the world's factory, it is considerably cheaper for them to build and produce just about anything. They can build ships, missiles, aircraft, guns, ammunition, uniforms, and anything else you can think of at a fraction of the cost. Moreover, they don't need to invest in insanely expensive research and development projects, because they can just steal our research and learn from our mistakes. Let America spend 200 billion researching the F-35, then China can steal everything about it and avoid all the costly mistakes they saw us make. Lastly, China doesn't have expensive pension plans, GI bills, or healthcare for their soldiers - all of which are significant expenses for the U.S.
3. My sense is that China is more willing to absorb losses and use their military power than the U.S. (particularly in a regional fight over Taiwan). It doesn't matter how much money you spend on your military if you don't have the will to use it.

What I'm trying to say is that we should be very concerned. :) This isn't just DOD trying to swindle the taxpayer.

CPT (Join to see) - your point is valid, but we are still hardly in the trouble the service chiefs would have congress believe. In 1990, the talk was all about how Iraq had the 4th largest army in the world, had years of combat experience that the US lacked, and had the "elite republican guard, one of the best trained forces in the world". How much of a mismatch was that war?

The US had around 20 aircraft carriers to 1 for China and 2 for Russia. We are ahead of both in most all of the key technological systems. The military has been using that same argument for decades. To them the defense budget is never big enough. Even during the big build up during the 80s they kept saying they needed more and more. The truth is that the military squanders billions on wasted programs. They spend hundreds of millions on developing one system or another and then change their mind and cancel it when a new shiny object catches their eye.

So what is the real threat we are guarding against? Neither China or Russia will ever be able to force project their military to our shores. We will never invade China or Russia conventionally. Nuclear weapons would be employed before we ever allowed Europe or South Korea to fall.

LTC (Join to see) - Thanks for your reply. There are some important differences between China and Iraq - namely that Iraq had nowhere near the technological parity that China currently has with the U.S. Technology matters.

Not going to deny that the DOD wastes money. Government wastes money. :) But despite that waste, no one would argue that we shouldn't spend any money on defense (I hope). So yes, the DOD is wasteful, but that's not really an argument why we should increase or decrease its funding. It's far more important to focus on the "why" are we spending this money and on "what" will allow us to achieve our national security objectives.

Which leads to your next question: why are we spending this money when China or Russia will never be a real threat? I think that depends on your definition of a "real threat." It seems like you are suggesting that because China or Russia will likely never invade in the U.S., we shouldn't be concerned. That completely ignores all of our substantial interests that exist beyond our borders. WWII never would have been fought with the mentality that nothing outside of America matters. Intangible and tangible benefits like trade routes, the $ as a reserve currency, and economic/military alliances preserve peace and prosperity for America. A multi-polar world with an aggressive China and Russia threatens that. The best way to deter war is to make oneself unassailable.

Btw, # of carriers is another flawed data point for assessing military power. That said, China has 2 working carriers and are diligently working on at least 2 more. They are intent on replacing the U.S. as the global superpower. We ignore this at our own peril.

And how is that M-4 or equivalent at assisting in that face to face battle? Could even half of the soldiers fit their bayonet on their weapon? Could they even draw it?

Basic has become a social tool to make all FEEL better It needs to go back a few steps where you call a boot a maggot and not get in trouble lol

I think we have finally made a credible shift philosophically on “fitness.” We aren’t there yet, but I think if you look at what SOF implemented about 10 years ago, that is a great start. If we can put a guy with one leg back on an ODA, anything is possible if there is buy in.