Which proves you don't understand anything about the military. The Air Force will argue that keeping their resources is essential for them to be able to do their job. Unlike splitting the Air Force off of the Army, there's no real-world scenario in which people can point to and say that this illustrates why we need to do this. Furthermore, let's look at how much Trump wants to give to the Space Force: $8 billion. What do you think is going to happen to that money? A not insignificant portion of it (assuming Congress votes to approve this) is simply going to be spent setting up the Space Force. Then, you have to ask: What is specifically going to be the mission of the Space Force? Spy satellites? Operating a military space station in orbit? How is it going to accomplish these things? Look, I'm about the biggest space geek around, and if I thought that this was going to accomplish anything other than fattening the wallets of defense contractors, I'd be all for it. If we took that $8 billion and gave it to NASA with the express purpose of finding a way to lower the cost of space flight, we'd get far more bang for our buck than we will handing the money over to a completely new branch of the military, that largely duplicates already existing programs. We will not be getting "Space Marines" from this. At most, and certainly not for several years from now, we'll get a few more spy satellites in orbit. Big deal.
That's exactly how "Space Force" is planned to be established. The Air Force doesn't have any real say over what the President and Congress does, except to argue and complain. Admittedly, sometimes that works. Nevertheless, I predict that Congress is never going to actually go through with this. I think it's all going to be a bunch of hooey anyway.
I've seen nothing to indicate that they've put that much thought into it. Generally, if the military wants a new toy, they get it, if they don't want the new toy Congress is offering, they still get it. Presently, each branch of the service, along with most, if not all, spy agencies have their own version of Space Command. I see no reason to think that the Air Force will have its capabilities stripped away while the others keep theirs. You know else thinks that it's a bad idea?
Complete BS. Look at the F-35. No branch wanted it. It was simply forced on the services as a cost cutting method.
Why don't they just rename the Air Force to Air & Space Force? They've already got a magazine. But seriously just let the Air Force slowly morph into the Space Force over time.
The creation of the Air Force was a mistake. It’d be akin to splitting off the sub force from the Navy. The Air Forces fixed and rotary wing assets (including personnel) should be transferred back into the Army with the remaining space and rocket assets turning into Space Force.
According to Tuckerfan you can't do that. "Do you think that the Air Force is going to give up Space Command the planes and helicopters and hand things back over to Space Force the Army?
Which is my second point, if Congress wants the military to have a new toy, but the military doesn't want it, they're still forced to take it.
Here's a hot take: don't create the Space Force and abolish all existing military except the Coast Guard.
The US Army Air Forces were established in 1941 while the US Army Air Corps still existed. The USAAC ceased to have its own administrative structure in 1942 and the USAAF carried on until it became the USAF in 1947.
Congress forced the F-35 on the U.S. military because they were convinced (wrongly) that it would save money. "See! Instead of purchasing FOUR different types of combat aircraft for the Navy, Air Force, and Marines we buy just one type and they all use different versions of it". But as it common. Many "cost cutting" programs in the military do anything but.
I literally have not laughed out loud that much at a Wordforge post in years. Well done, sir. Well done.
Which proves my fucking point that nothing productive will come of this, you idiot. But as with the idea of us playing planetary billiards one day, you hear "space" and "military," and you're all: Without giving the matter any further thought.
Based on the fact that I've read a bit about it, have worked for military contractors, and have known a number of people in the military. I don't claim to be an expert on the subject, by any stretch of the imagination. I don't think that it's going out on too much of a limb to say that the people here, who've actually served in the military, will generally agree that I have a better understanding of the military than you do, "coach."
Nope. Not even close. For starters, I never pretended to be an "expert" on military and history matters, while having a business degree. Next, you'll notice that while you get heaps of abuse dumped on you by ex-military members here, I do not. That should tell you something, but in your twisted mind, it only serves to confirm how "right" you are. Finally, you've never said anything about you working for a military contractor, or what you did while you were there. That, if nothing else, puts me ahead of you, because I have mentioned working for them, and what I did while I was there.
I don't recall claiming I was an "expert" either. Just that I knew more due to studying the issues than someone who had not or someone in the military who had experience and a specialty far removed from the topic at hand (like a person who served aboard submarines level of expertise on tank warfare and vice versa). I never claimed to have the exact same background as you do. Just basically. And if you (and they) were being honest I think you would admit that most if not all of the ex military members here who have criticized me do it for reasons entirely different than my knowledge and experience (or lack there of) regarding the military. By way of example: Anna disagrees with me on almost everything because she cannot stand my views on race and racism while shootER dislike me because of what he considers by self righteousness and arrogance.
You have a business management degree fro, a mail order college and think Trump is a good business owner. You think the bible is true and say you have studied it yet you don't know anything about it. The ship has sailed on your ability to study. You have little to no reading comprehension, retention, or cog I give thought processes. A blind mentally retarded dog in a coma would get mote from studying than you have shown. That is a fact you have proven again and again. Now stop hitting your wife and go catch the prisoner you let escape. You might be teaching school tomorrow and you have things to do.
Incorrect. 1) I graduated from a regular four year university. 2) I don't think Donald Trump is good business owner and never have. He played a major role in the death of the USFL (United States Football League). 3) I think the Bible is true. But I don't think it all of it is meant to be taken literally.. The early portion of Genesis (until Abraham is introduced) and the chapters of Revelations after Chapter 3 most notably.
Do you have a split personality? For a while there you were actually making good posts but now your posts these last few weeks have turned back to shit.
