NationStates Jolt Archive

OK...let's make a big leap of the imagination here.

Let's assume that, for whatever reason, the U.S. has decided to modify it's military to a massive extent. Instead of being the force-projecting global force that it is today, let us assume the the U.S. wishes to change the role of it's armed forces to a strictly defensive role.

A couple of things...

1. All land-based ICBM's are to be retained.
2. All operations and bases outside of the U.S. are to be ended/closed (Yes, including Iraq, Afghanistan and Korea...this is a hypothetical situation after all... :p ) The elimination of these overseas operations allow for much more flexibility with the budget.

What changes would have to be made in the military to facilitate such a change?

I'll throw some ideas out to get the ball rolling.

Army

-To what extent would the role of armored forces be reduced or modified?
-Would a greater emphasis for air-power be placed on the regional use of helicopters?
-Would a greater emphasis be placed on artillery?
-To what extent would force reduction be necessary? What sort of shifts in manpower would be necessary in the Active Duty, Reserve, and National Guard forces?

Navy

-Exactly what changes, if any, would be made to the SSBN submarine fleet? Would it stay as is? Would it be reduced? Would the subs be modified for use as attack/cruise missle platforms?
-To what extent would the current nuclear deep-sea submarine fleet be modified?
- Exactly what force reduction might be seen in terms of the number of Aircraft Carriers?
- Might battleships and helicopter carriers see a resurgence?
- To what extent would the role of amphibious landing and transport ships change?

Air Force

-To what extent might the long-range strategic bomber force be altered?
-Would it be beneficial to retire all B-1's and B-52's in favor of B-2's and fighter-bomber type aircraft?
-To what extent might the Air Force see reductions? Would an increased use of helicopters for regional defense facilitate a significant reduction in the Air Force?

Marines

-Since the Marines are, more than any other branch, an offensive force, how will their role in the Armed Forces change?

Coast Guard

-Should the Coast Guard be permanently merged with the Navy?
-Should the Coast Guard be permanently merged with Federal, State and Local law enforcement?
-Should the Coast Guard be reduced, or increased in size and importance?

Other

-To what extent will recruiting be affected by this change?
-How will such a change in military policy impact interaction between the military and intelligence organizations such as the CIA and NSA?
-What new technologies or weapons might be developed to aid the armed forces in their new role?

I'm really interested in peoples thoughts on this idea...feel free to respond to any or all thoughts I listed, or any topics of your own.

Well I think they would greatly reduce the number of Aircraft Carriers they have from twelve (I think) to two. They'd still need their destroyers, cruisers and subs for the carrier fleet but the Ohio class subs would become completely useless. With the carriers and subs gone the navy could put more funding into their aegis cruisers and anti-balistic missle programmes.

The marines would become completely useless. They can't be kept for urban peacekeeping, as we've seen from Iraq, they are an amphibious assult force and nothing more.

We need a branch like the national guard.. that's actually THIS NATION ONLY.

An anti-invasion force, designed to deal with the idea that people are coming here to attack.

Something like an emergency SWAT team. With tanks.

There needs to be a way to serve this country that guarantees you won't be shoved off in to some oil war.

Well, the combined U.S. police forces could probably repel any invasion force that could make it to the mainland U.S., so you don't really need any armed forces at all, and if some threat does turn up, you can always build up your military again. It shouldn't take too long. Towards the end of World War Two the U.S. was producing aircraft carriers at the rate of one a week. I would keep satilites to keep an eye on things, and I'd put more effort into peace mongering to make sure no threat arises.

Defense
Hmm....
Army
-Armour would be reduced
-More Artillary
-More Warthogs and Helis
-Resurgence of the Huey. :cool:

Airforce
-Bombers go by
-More Fighter Bombers
-More Warthogs

Navy
-more Shallow water Submarines
-Carriers to be replaced by Tactical ones(But youve got to remember Americas Indian Ocean(pacific too?) fleet contribution to the Boxing day Tsunami was awesome and Tactical Carriers couldnt do that!
-More Heli Carriers(see Tactical)
-Battleships no(They are an excellent helliopolis). but more Heavy Cruisers

Marines
-Panzer Kaput ie they would be unnecasary largly.

Delator im very impressed with what youve said i didnt even read it till id put down my thoughts good work. :) *

*I didnt reall consider Coast Guard but

Coast Guard
-More and still seperate from Navy

Heehee, someone should email this to the White House on dept of Homeland Security headed paper.

Well, the combined U.S. police forces could probably repel any invasion force that could make it to the mainland U.S., so you don't really need any armed forces at all, and if some threat does turn up, you can always build up your military again. It shouldn't take too long. Towards the end of World War Two the U.S. was producing aircraft carriers at the rate of one a week. I would keep satilites to keep an eye on things, and I'd put more effort into peace mongering to make sure no threat arises.

Ignoring the obvious laughabilty of U.S. police forces repelling a military invasion...the Aircraft Carriers produced in WWII were not Nuclear powered.

It makes a little bit of a difference. ;)

Another reason America doesn't need an armed forces is that if it turned out they did need them, they could just say, Europe, Japan, China, here is a swack load of money, give us some armaments.

Okay, you don't need to get rid of your entire armed forces, but a high trained and well equiped force of 50,000 should be plenty. Canada doesn't want to fight the U.S., Mexico doesn't want to fight the U.S. Even North Korea doesn't want to fight the U.S., they just wanna act tough. China's one child policy makes imperial wars politically impossible, democratic India feels no need to kick America's butt. Europe, Japan and Russia are full of old people and have small draft age populations... Who on earth wants to invade the U.S.?

Who on earth wants to invade Britain? Or France?

Hell, even Canada's armed forces total more than 50,000...who wants to invade them?

:rolleyes: