Is The US Military Following Russia's Lead In Its Race To The Bottom? [Archive]

SASless

22nd Dec 2022, 13:53

We have seen the results of decay within the Russian Military as demonstrated by its failures in Ukraine.

Also, we have seen how Warfare has changed due to technology.

Russian military failures came more from corruption within the senior ranks.

More and more we hear of problems within the US Military and Department of Defense at the Senior Leadership levels.

We saw a disastrous end to the Afghanistan War after almost two decades of fighting there and a similar sad end to the Iraq War.

Under Reagan and Lehman we saw a 600 Ship US Navy that was too big and too costly and now we are looking at a 280 Ship Navy.

The Air Force has major shortcomings in Pilots and aircraft.

The Army is as always very slow to modernize.

Russia and China remain our two strategic foes and the Chinese are building up their forces in size and capability.

Are we headed to a position that would indicate to the. Chinese and Russians that we no longer are as capable as we think. we are?

Remembering one does not get attacked when thought strong...but rather it happens when thought to be too weak.

https://www.oann.com/commentary/u-s-strategic-commander-warns-the-u-s-military-is-a-sinking-ship/?fbclid=IwAR1oGWlLPVyl_4E_y4VD7jfAtGLA7RyOOPG-NLUBLiKAblIK1CCD5uW3mKk

downsizer

22nd Dec 2022, 15:33

Short answer no....

Long answer, there are problems for sure but the situation is incomparable to China and Russia.

Chugalug2

22nd Dec 2022, 22:15

OAN:-
According to the survey, only 13% of 18 to 29-year-olds are highly willing to join the military, while 46% would refuse to do so. Given that more than 75% of America’s 17 to 24-year-olds are ineligible to serve because of health problems, obesity, substance abuse, or criminal records, this does not bode well for recruitment.

I find the 75% ineligible statistic very alarming, or is it just journalistic hype? As to the 46% figure, in 1933 the Oxford Union passed the motion that "This house will not fight for its King and Country". When, 6 years later, push came to shove they did of course. Events, dear boy, events...

unmanned_droid

23rd Dec 2022, 00:19

Big Pistons Forever

23rd Dec 2022, 01:24

I think every military is having recruitment challenges, starting with the fact that the numbers in the desired 18-25 demographic is at an all time historical low. Physical and medical fitness are also lower than ever. That being said it is still far from a crisis.

IMO the real challenge will be if the institution learn the lessons from Ukraine. The first big one is the fact that era of traditional land maneuver is over. The second big one is spending on building materiel capacity. This means cutting back on the bling in favour of buying lots of boring but vital ammo stocks and repair items.

Finally the theory of an information connected land battle space is now not theoretical anymore it is now non optional to achieve mission success. This has huge implications on doctrine for all three elements and the associated training and equipment.

Asturias56

23rd Dec 2022, 08:04

"This means cutting back on the bling in favour of buying lots of boring but vital ammo stocks and repair items."

I'll believe it's happening when I see a senior British Politican at the wheel of a large delivery truck outside a warehouse

CoodaShooda

23rd Dec 2022, 12:11

Less Hair

23rd Dec 2022, 12:20

The US is generations ahead in terms of technical equipment, networking and planning. Up to total dominance.
Nobody is falling back while Russia feels like never having moved forward since WW2 and Stalin.

Lonewolf_50

23rd Dec 2022, 21:04

We have seen the results of decay within the Russian Military as demonstrated by its failures in Ukraine.
Also, we have seen how Warfare has changed due to technology.
Russian military failures came more from corruption within the senior ranks.
More and more we hear of problems within the US Military and Department of Defense at the Senior Leadership levels.
We saw a disastrous end to the Afghanistan War after almost two decades of fighting there and a similar sad end to the Iraq War.
Under Reagan and Lehman we saw a 600 Ship US Navy that was too big and too costly and now we are looking at a 280 Ship Navy.
The Air Force has major shortcomings in Pilots and aircraft.
The Army is as always very slow to modernize.
Russia and China remain our two strategic foes and the Chinese are building up their forces in size and capability.
Are we headed to a position that would indicate to the. Chinese and Russians that we no longer are as capable as we think. we are? Hard to say. The crucial factor is in training, which costs money. Readiness accounts come from the O & M accounts, which Congress cuts and boosts in a fickle and random manner. This has been true for decades.
We had problems similar to this in the 90's that I recall - with great psychic pain - yet our military remained an effective fighting force.
One hopes that the lessons learned from what is ongoing in Ukraine at present is being digested and applied for use later on.
Your 'glass half full' take is not agreed.

Flugzeug A

23rd Dec 2022, 21:46

When assessing America’s capacity to engage in hostilities with China and/or Russia, you could also include the capabilities of potential allies in both Europe and Asia.

Unless America is the aggressor, it is unlikely to stand alone.

What do you define as an aggressor?
The US’ has been involved a few fracas around the Globe since WW2 but , you’re right , you’ll never stand alone.
All the UK usually needs is a postcard with ‘C’mon in , the potential war’s lovely...’ writ on it , & our government will do everything possible ( including lying ) to justify joining in!

Asturias56

24th Dec 2022, 12:34

In 2021 the USA was still spending more on defence than the next 9 nations in the SIPRI list put together - that includes China, Russia, the UK, Germany.........

They spent over twice the estimated Chinese spend and approx 12 times the estimated Russian spend. 38% of worldwide spending on defence is by the USA alone

I really don't think we need to fret very much

Lyneham Lad

24th Dec 2022, 13:20

This article in The Times seems to indicate the West is staying ahead.

Ukraine is outflanking Russia with ammunition from Big Tech (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/b35f8bb2-82ce-11ed-ab78-11b70ed96428?shareToken=cfe4f36bd53e55ed890bb4505294d755)

Snippet:-
Ukrainian soldiers have revolutionised the way battles will be fought in the 21st century by waging an “algorithmic war” that enables Kyiv to outgun invading forces with far fewer troops.

Artificial intelligence developed by companies in the West has given Ukraine a technological edge over Russia, military experts said, turning the tide of the war.

Artillery continues to dominate the war in a way that would be familiar to generals fighting battles centuries ago. However, the accuracy, speed and deadliness of Ukrainian strikes has dramatically increased thanks to software developed by Palantir, a US tech firm co-founded by the Republican billionaire Peter Thiel (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/palantir-chief-alex-karp-war-is-here-you-need-a-pariah-on-your-side-vmvj75tx6).

Those who have witnessed the AI in action have been left in no doubt about its revolutionary power. “The Russians are using their artillery like it’s the First World War. What the Ukrainians are doing is completely different,” one defence source said. “A digital army is fighting an analogue army. What you are seeing is that the digital army, despite being a fraction of the size, is able to massively outperform its analogue adversary.”

Palantir (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peter-thiels-billionaire-school-can-teach-universities-a-lesson-qwhgggc85) is closely linked to the CIA, which was an early investor, and it has opened an office in Kyiv. The firm played a key role for the Department of Health during the pandemic. Software called Foundry worked out where vaccines were running short and ministers relied on it to track uptake.

The company’s software in Ukraine, MetaConstellation, relies on intelligence gathered on enemy troop positions by commercial satellites, heat sensors and reconnaissance drones as well as spies working behind enemy lines and ordinary Ukrainians pinpointing the locations of Russian troops on the country’s E-Enemy app.

The software uses AI to transform the data into a map highlighting the probable locations of Russian artillery, tanks and troops. A Ukrainian soldier using a tablet device is given a list of co-ordinates and can then direct their fire. The technology also “learns” from previous strikes, meaning that it is constantly getting better at identifying and locating materiel.

Click the link for the remainder, diagrams etc.

SASless

24th Dec 2022, 18:59

Spending lots means nothing if you are buying the wrong kit or wasting it on programs you do not need.

Remember that 600 Ship Navy thing.....that could not be manned or supported effectively by the logistic chain?

Or did Reagan just out spend the Russians into going broke when they tried to keep up?

Wasn't it Star Wars that was the. straw that broke the Camels's Back?

Asturias56

25th Dec 2022, 08:17

"Spending lots means nothing if you are buying the wrong kit or wasting it on programs you do not need."

True - a real problem is that by the time a new "Strategy" is approved, the kit is designed and ordered and then delivered may 10-20 years have passed and teh question has changed.

See the Littoral Combat Ship (or the Zumwalt class) saga - nothing wrong with the idea but the strategy has now changed and we're into Distributed Marine Operations. Still the USN will have a load of reasonably effective small ships out of it to deploy so its not a total disaster.

it's also worth pointing out that it isn't just the West who invests in the wrong kit or has problems getting stuff into the front line sometimes - - most major Russian naval programs are delayed badly

Phil_R

25th Dec 2022, 20:55

OAN:-

I find the 75% ineligible statistic very alarming, or is it just journalistic hype? As to the 46% figure, in 1933 the Oxford Union passed the motion that "This house will not fight for its King and Country". When, 6 years later, push came to shove they did of course. Events, dear boy, events...

I'm coming at this from a UK perspective but I had a conversation with three people around the age of twenty a couple of weeks ago in which one of them said she'd considered joining the military, but rejected the idea after looking into it. We were astonished as she didn't really seem the type. Further discussion revealed the following reasons for this, which all three agreed on.

- They found military appeals to patriotism laughable and wondered how desperate anyone would have to be to rely on that sort of persuasion;
- They didn't believe recruiting commercials depicting military life as adventurous and fun, assuming that military service would mostly involve living in a mouldy house interrupted by brief periods of standing in the rain absorbing personal abuse for meagre wages. "Worse than prison" was one comment.
- They didn't like or trust politicians and did not want to work for them;
- They didn't want to be forced to participate in possibly-illegal, clearly-pointless wars (Blair following Bush for reasons of his own personal aggrandisement, etc).
- They simply didn't consider the UK cared about them enough to be worth defending, given the poor life prospects of people their age in 2022.

Every single one of them said they'd be more than happy to take any necessary risk to defend things they personally felt were worthwhile and I don't think modern youngsters are particularly more cowardly than those of the late 1930s. Still, whether you agree with these people or not, these are very hard things to change in the minds of potential signers-up, not least because some of them are pretty well true.

P

Big Pistons Forever

25th Dec 2022, 22:33

I think the number one indicator of interest in joining is having a family member or close friend serving or have served. Screwing over serving members or those who have left the Armed Forces to save money, is a particularly good example of cutting off your nose to spite your face as they are unlikely to promote joining up. Sadly the bean counters who run Militaries now seem to only know the cost of everyone and the value of no one.

megan

26th Dec 2022, 00:14

Sadly the bean counters who run Militaries now seem to only know the cost of everyone and the value of no one
Nothing changes, parsimonious Treasury

"MESSAGE FROM THE DUKE OF WELLINGTON TO THE BRITISH FOREIGN OFFICE IN LONDON -- written from Central Spain, August 1812

Gentlemen,

Whilst marching from Portugal to a position which commands the approach to Madrid and the French forces, my officers have been diligently complying with your requests which have been sent by H.M. ship from London to Lisbon and thence by dispatch to our headquarters.

We have enumerated our saddles, bridles, tents and tent poles, and all manner of sundry items for which His Majesty's Government holds me accountable. I have dispatched reports on the character, wit, and spleen of every officer. Each item and every farthing has been accounted for, with two regrettable exceptions for which I beg your indulgence.

Unfortunately the sum of one shilling and ninepence remains unaccounted for in one infantry battalion's petty cash and there has been a hideous confusion as the number of jars of raspberry jam issued to one cavalry regiment during a sandstorm in western Spain. This reprehensible carelessness may be related to the pressure of circumstance, since we are at war with France, a fact which may come as a bit of a surprise to you gentlemen in Whitehall.

This brings me to my present purpose, which is to request elucidation of my instructions from His Majesty's Government so that I may better understand why I am dragging an army over these barren plains. I construe that perforce it must be one of two alternative duties, as given below. I shall pursue either one with the best of my ability, but I cannot do both:

1. To train an army of uniformed British clerks in Spain for the benefit of the accountants and copy-boys in London or perchance,

2. To see to it that the forces of Napoleon are driven out of Spain.

Your most obedient servant

Wellington

Asturias56

26th Dec 2022, 08:34

Absolutely no provenance for that letter but of course the Great Duke loathed people second guessing him over his shoulder

Martin the Martian

26th Dec 2022, 11:49

Phil_R, that is a very interesting post and those young people seem to have their heads screwed on. It is indeed very difficult to argue with their reasoning.

SASless

26th Dec 2022, 13:19

One might add that having engaged and fought several wars that lasted decades and each ending in less than desired outcomes and all not effectively explained by the Government as to exactly why they had to be fought...then not fought with the full mobilization of the population and our economies....with generations of war fighters who felt betrayed by the politicians.....that might explain the critical views held by the young today. Surely, their family members who did serve and learned the reality of limited war and the lack of forth rightfulness of the national leadership.....and the gross failures of the military leadership to challenge the civilian leadership re ensuring proper goal setting and strategy proves young folks today might be a bit wiser than than their years.

JohnDixson

26th Dec 2022, 13:34

SAS, Is it OK to violently agree with everything you wrote, less the last phrase re the younger set being wiser?

Asturias56

26th Dec 2022, 14:34

I'm pretty sure that if the call comes then people will respond

My mother, who (along with Churchill, Field Marshall Montgomery & JV Stalin won WW2) always used to say how useless the post war generation were and that they would never fight. She had the grace to apologise after the Falklands War.

unmanned_droid

26th Dec 2022, 19:50

I'm coming at this from a UK perspective but I had a conversation with three people around the age of twenty a couple of weeks ago in which one of them said she'd considered joining the military, but rejected the idea after looking into it. We were astonished as she didn't really seem the type. Further discussion revealed the following reasons for this, which all three agreed on.

- They found military appeals to patriotism laughable and wondered how desperate anyone would have to be to rely on that sort of persuasion;
- They didn't believe recruiting commercials depicting military life as adventurous and fun, assuming that military service would mostly involve living in a mouldy house interrupted by brief periods of standing in the rain absorbing personal abuse for meagre wages. "Worse than prison" was one comment.
- They didn't like or trust politicians and did not want to work for them;
- They didn't want to be forced to participate in possibly-illegal, clearly-pointless wars (Blair following Bush for reasons of his own personal aggrandisement, etc).
- They simply didn't consider the UK cared about them enough to be worth defending, given the poor life prospects of people their age in 2022.

Every single one of them said they'd be more than happy to take any necessary risk to defend things they personally felt were worthwhile and I don't think modern youngsters are particularly more cowardly than those of the late 1930s. Still, whether you agree with these people or not, these are very hard things to change in the minds of potential signers-up, not least because some of them are pretty well true.

P

I'm 40 and I thought that 20 years ago after 5 years in the ATC and a 4 year degree. I'd seen what went on and how they lived and the type of people you'd have ot take orders from. The only thing that could have persuaded me to put up with that was the chance at a front seat, preferably in a helicopter or a.n.other aircraft. As it was UAS only recruited those with no need of glasses so off I went to design aircraft.

I still can't disagree with anything those young people said.

Roland Pulfrew

27th Dec 2022, 09:26

I'm pretty sure that if the call comes then people will respond

My mother, …… She had the grace to apologise after the Falklands War.

Your mother had nothing to apologise for. The Armed Forces of the UK at the time of the Falklands, we’re 100% volunteer. Trained well and ready to fight, even if some of the kit left something to be desired. There was no requirement to call up the wider population for a major war.

And that was 40 years ago.

The demography of the UK, has changed significantly since then.

Asturias56

27th Dec 2022, 10:00

I think the general political malaise shows there is little political backing for the armed services - constant cuts sends a clear message as to how you are (not) valued

Two's in

27th Dec 2022, 14:48

War with China or Russia has been the bread and butter of US military planners since then end of WW2. This focus (or obsession?) has meant that the multitude of armed conflicts we have subsequently engaged in, have generally been poorly planned and poorly equipped. The US turns up for low intensity conflicts with high intensity kit (because we can only plan for full scale conflict with China or Russia) and any success depends on the moral fiber and determination of those fighting the battles, not the "skill and intellect" of those planning them back in the Pentagon. The Brits are just as bad at this, its called turning up equipped to fight the last war, not the current one.

The US generally prevails through sheer numbers and determination, no thanks to the piss-poor planning or lack of strategic thinking from the grown-ups. If budgets or socioeconomic factors ever reduce that ability to turn up with more kit (even the wrong kit) than everybody else, success might not be as guaranteed.

PS. The current percentage of those serving in the US Armed Forces is less than 1% of the total population, so it's not really that much of an issue when "only 13% of 18 to 29-year-olds are highly willing to join the military".

Saintsman

28th Dec 2022, 13:13

Whilst it it not true for a large number of the younger generation, a still sizeable number would rather stay at home and play video games (and be paid for the privilege...).

No need to put themselves in the way of danger or discomfort. Why would they even consider enlisting, as any conflict is likely to be overseas and doesn't directly affect them?

SASless

28th Dec 2022, 16:54

Two....that 13% number ignores the over 70% number for those unfit for service so the spare numbers to draw from are quite small and probably in the single digits. That is the problem.

Any way you slice it the military across the board is failing to achieve its recruiting needs so something shall have to give....standards or capability...neither of which shall be good.

t43562

30th Dec 2022, 17:10

I'm 40 and I thought that 20 years ago after 5 years in the ATC and a 4 year degree. I'd seen what went on and how they lived and the type of people you'd have ot take orders from. The only thing that could have persuaded me to put up with that was the chance at a front seat, preferably in a helicopter or a.n.other aircraft. As it was UAS only recruited those with no need of glasses so off I went to design aircraft.

I still can't disagree with anything those young people said.

Though I'm from one of the former colonies at least 3 of my classmates entered the British Army. One became a Major and when I heard that I shuddered to think of the incredible risk of getting told what to do by such a person in any dangerous situation. He wasn't my enemy - I just got to work with him - he had fixed ideas, didn't listen, no insight and very keen on pressing the official school line on everything. He didn't think about the situation he was in very clearly or carefully and it was necessary to politely ignore his attempts to order one around and do what made sense.

While I'm interested in military matters the idea of putting my life in the hands of people who might randomly be like that is quite horrifying. We all work with people we think of as idiotic at some time or other but not usually ones who can tell you to go and get yourself killed.

pax britanica

30th Dec 2022, 18:23

Surely in todays military expertise at video games is more valuable than phyiscial fitness .

I do some mentoruing in a major industry and very few people I have talked to would ever consider joining the UK services because by and latrge they are not good job prospects, Often use outdated equipment ( thats not so much a criticism but just a reality that you cannot keep updating military gear every few years) . then you ahve the ratehr unhappy 'incidents that occur, untilr ecently I lived near Deepcut in Surrey where Brits reading this will know that a verys erious incident that cost lives was never investigated to the extent a great many people felt it should be, In that area, encompassing Aldershot , Sandhurst , and other major army locations there was by and large a supportive view of the army and that was damaged by Deepcut , recently damaged more by army housing scandals and no doubt even more just this week with allegations about sexual intimidation/assault at Sandhurst (UKs Westpoint) . All of those factors got huge national exposure and cannot help recruitment.
In Uk there is also the issue that a great many twenty somethings regard themselves as Europeans and think that patriotism , in terms of fighting for ones country when they dont know what their country is, becomes hard to overcome.. Could anyone seriously go to war for Boris Johnson for example or fight for Queen and Country Many being unsure what their country really is, Scots < N Irish and Welsh for example would be highly unlikely to fight for an English centric UK that treats them with disdain .
I have had the good fortune, and it has largely been tha, to have to interact with members of the UK and US forces and the great majority of people I dealt with I ahd a significant degree of admisration for and had no doubt at all that if things got nasty they would be both ready and willing .

Of course in a situation like this people do change their minds (WW2 quoted as an example) and as Ukraine has shown real belief in their country is perhaps the most important issue along with technical meritocracy and inginuity all of which count double in this conflct because until recently the Russians would have counted the Ukrainians on their side.

A real challnge for any government and on way way beyond the current vision , capbility or integrity of our current one.

Big Pistons Forever

30th Dec 2022, 18:23

The nightmare scenario for a military planner is the so called 3 block war. The first block has offensive kinetic military operations are being carried out, the next block over the Military mission is support to host nations security forces and the next block over from that is a pure humanitarian support mission.
Any military and especially the US military, will be at its best when given a pure conventional offensive force mission. Gulf War 2 was arguably the most effective use of military force in the history of warfare. The assigned purely military mission was simple, defeat Sandam's forces and invade and occupy Iraq.

It all fell apart just like in Afghanistan, when the mission ceased to be a purely military one and morphed into a conflict shaped by amorphous, ever changing and inherently incompatible foreign policy objectives. This IMO reinforced senior military leadership belief that ultimately the only use of military force that really mattered was full on state on state warfare. Therefore it has always resisted involvement in "Nation Building" exercises and concentrated on building conventional forces that can win battles against a peer level adversary. This has been encouraged by the American military industrial complex because it incentivizes the development of advanced and expensive kit.

The fundamental problem is for almost 50 years, since the end of significant American involvement the Vietnam war, the western world has not experienced major sustained conflict. Almost all of the political leadership grew up in this period and they and the general population have lost any appreciation of what military forces actually are designed to do. This I think is ultimately the cause of the current recruiting challenges.

The Ukrainian Military doesn't have any problem recruiting new members. Those recruits aren't joining because they want to help fill sand bags when there is a flood or participate in feel good "peace stabilization operations" they are joining to kill Russians. In a perfect world the political leadership would have a frank and honest conversation to their population about why countries have a military and what it is supposed to do. The chance of that happening are less than zero but I think it would actually improve recruiting.

I think it is deliciously ironic that Putin has singlehandedly done more to reverse the decline in Western Military capability since Hitler, by reminding everyone why countries have military forces.

Sue Vêtements

3rd Jan 2023, 15:32

I knew a young lady who wanted to join the army and went on a weekend recruiting course where they performed some exercises one of which was to get over an electric fence

They gave her team some equipment like old barrels and a couple of planks, so she said "let's lean the plank on the fence, climb up it and drop over the other side"

They did this but were disqualified so of course she asked why. The response was "You touched the fence and you can't do that because it's electric" to which she replied "Yes but I touched it with the plank and wood doesn't conduct electricity" Needless to say this fell on deaf ears and her recruitment prospects diminished

Someone later took her aside and pointed out that far from being sad, she should actually be pleased to no longer be considering a career in the army as she'd have to put up with a lifetime of this sort of nonsense. She ended up with a career in IT instead

Video Mixdown

3rd Jan 2023, 19:01

I knew a young lady who wanted to join the army and went on a weekend recruiting course where they performed some exercises one of which was to get over an electric fence

They gave her team some equipment like old barrels and a couple of planks, so she said "let's lean the plank on the fence, climb up it and drop over the other side"
They did this but were disqualified so of course she asked why. The response was "You touched the fence and you can't do that because it's electric" to which she replied "Yes but I touched it with the plank and wood doesn't conduct electricity" Needless to say this fell on deaf ears and her recruitment prospects diminished
Someone later took her aside and pointed out that far from being sad, she should actually be pleased to no longer be considering a career in the army as she'd have to put up with a lifetime of this sort of nonsense. She ended up with a career in IT instead
Anyone who has taken part in these exercises knows that the purpose is to see if candidates can demonstrate leadership, problem solving and teamwork. She demonstrated a willingness to ignore instructions and take dangerous shortcuts. I'd say the test worked well in weeding her out.