How are we mercs again? Hmmm....I would do some research there Ducky and see how often volunteers made up the majority of the military in our history and I am shocked that you would say something that is totally without merit, so unlike you.

It is the nature of the AVF to have transformed our heritage - the citizen soldier, the army raised (in the language of the Constitution) from the population to defend the nation in time of threat - into an imperial standing army. We have substituted monetary inducements for patriotism, opportunism for obligation. Let me state yet again: had the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan required a draft to fight them, we'd not have gone into Iraq nor have turned Afghanistan into workfare for the AVF.

Either or. Either it's national defense and we raise an army to meet a threat ... or it's imperialism and we keep and use a standing army as an aggressive arm of empire. The first way is called the American System. The second way, the AVFD, well, it won't work without mercenaries.

So, those other times when we did not have a draft in place they were mercs too? As for your line about "workfare" in Afghanistan, how can you expect me to take that seriously? The opinions you on the AVF are usually so off mark that it is laughable, the Draft was a pretty new thing Ducky, we have only had two peace time drafts in our history, it usually gets dropped after a war, volunteers have usually made up the bulk of the military in peace and in war.
My opinion on the draft has changed, I am for it due to the huge divide that I think exists right now between the civilian and military population, we are almost becoming a caste system. I think your reasons for wanting a draft are wrong, the purpose of one is not to somehow get people rioting and protesting in the streets against wars YOU deem not to be needed. I have to say this as well, at times with some of your comments I think your knowledge of what goes on in todays military is just not up to snuff and I am shocked that a man who retired from the military does not keep himself as well informed as he could be with contacts I am sure you still have.

While Rubber Ducky knows that I strongly agree with his yearning for a properly designed National Service Act in my comment above I was merely expressing the fact that the AVF it is what it is in today’s world. Even if we had conscription certain specialties in NSW, nuclear, EOD, etc., would likely need bonuses to retain expensively trained and experienced people with specialized skill sets.

1. it used to be that LIC was a zero-promotion war. This LIC - Afghanistan - is the horse an entire cohort of Army officers and others are riding to fame, glory, promotion, and employment as far as the eye can see. Call it workfare or call the the military total-employment plan, but it smacks of self-aggrandizing careerism and the Army has become so immersed in it that guys like you think it's the baseline. It's an aberration: war is not what America stands for.

2. The time-honored model of the US military, the correct one under our Constitution and the military framework devised by the Founding fathers, is of a peacetime professional cadre of soldiers on which in time of war the draft contingent falls in on and takes the entire nation to war.

3. Note that the Navy is different from the Army. 'Raise an army.' 'Maintain a navy.' Constitutional language acknowledging that this island nation needs a navy at all times, an army only for war. (No mention of the Air Force. Where are the strict constructionists when you need 'em?)

4. One of those periods of peacetime draft was the post-Korean-War draft of the earlier Cold War. That was (from 1946 until the Wall fell) a time of existential threat to our nation's existence. Vietnam took over the draft, but it's 'peacetime' origins were extraordinarily war-like.

5. What's laughable about the AVF is its failure to produce victory. Imagine, a military costing more than that of the next 20(!) nations combined and we could not win in Iraq and cannot win in Afghanistan ... against ragtag irregulars. That's a laugher. Show me it actually can do its job, show me it works, then you have standing.

6. The American People should be the final judge of when war is to be sustained. The Commander in Chief and Congress take us to war; the American people keep us there, or so it should be. Our nation, our military, our future. If the political price of an unsustainable war is riots in the street and politicians going down with the war (a la Vietnam), that's the (messy) democratic system at work. Or you could do as we have done with the AVF, hire out the wars to contractors and 'volunteers,' keep the price of war hidden in debt and in families grieving in isolation, and attempt to create globally the American Imperium.

7. Good to see you coming around on the draft. I've described those in the military and the civilian world they protect as two separate tribes drifting past each other on ice floes, nearby, common language, but increasingly isolated from each other ... to neither's benefit. And your military 'casts' has developed a sense of entitlement, a belief in its superiority that border on arrogance.

“it used to be that LIC was a zero-promotion war. This LIC - Afghanistan - is the horse an entire cohort of Army officers and others are riding to fame, glory, promotion, and employment as far as the eye can see. Call it workfare or call the military total-employment plan, but it smacks of self-aggrandizing careerism and the Army has become so immersed in it that guys like you think it's the baseline. It's an aberration: war is not what America stands for.”

-The whole post is border line delusional. I guess I must have slept through the brief where the Military decides where we go, who goes and when. Not even worth an argument. Cannot believe you posted that and want to be taken seriously still, could have sworn I would not take you seriously on something like that in another post but sigh...it is what it is.

"The time-honored model of the US military, the correct one under our Constitution and the military framework devised by the Founding fathers, is of a peacetime professional cadre of soldiers on which in time of war the draft contingent falls in on and takes the entire nation to war."

-Great, when we become a rural agrarian population again that cannot be affected by any of the modern tech and the threats that go with it cannot get across our oceans then we can go back to a militia, tell me when that happens and I will be ready ;)

"Note that the Navy is different from the Army. 'Raise an army.' 'Maintain a navy.' Constitutional language acknowledging that this island nation needs a navy at all times, an army only for war. (No mention of the Air Force. Where are the strict constructionists when you need 'em?)"

- We are talking about the military Ducky, cannot pick on just the Army sorry, and if we have a draft they will get them too and we have for the most part had a decent sized standing Army since Post WWI, they saw the threats coming from Japan and started building on it.

“One of those periods of peacetime draft was the post-Korean-War draft of the earlier Cold War. That was (from 1946 until the Wall fell) a time of existential threat to our nation's existence. Vietnam took over the draft, but it's 'peacetime' origins were extraordinarily war-like.”

–You point on that is?

“What's laughable about the AVF is its failure to produce victory. Imagine, a military costing more than that of the next 20(!) nations combined and we could not win in Iraq and cannot win in Afghanistan ... against ragtag irregulars. That's a laugher. Show me it actually can do its job, show me it works, then you have standing.”

-You mean like the Conscript Army in Korea and Vietnam?(Who were filled with mostly Vols by the way) How about the other little conflicts we in the AVF have had since then? Don’t get to count those as wins Ducky? ;) Also, Ducky, I would stick to subs when talking about tactics and effectiveness if I were you. The Military is doing a very good job at the tactical level and we have yet to get smacked down at any spot and talking like you can meet irregulars on the field of battle and just defeat them is something a dilettante would say. The guys on the ground don’t make strategy, talk to your boys in DC on that one, we are still kicking ass at the Tactical level, thanks.

“The American People should be the final judge of when war is to be sustained. The Commander in Chief and Congress take us to war; the American people keep us there, or so it should be. Our nation, our military, our future. If the political price of an unsustainable war is riots in the street and politicians going down with the war (a la Vietnam), that's the (messy) democratic system at work. Or you could do as we have done with the AVF, hire out the wars to contractors and 'volunteers,' keep the price of war hidden in debt and in families grieving in isolation, and attempt to create globally the American Imperium.”

-That whole post makes me start to think you are throwing on a tin hat in your golden days Ducky. The Civilians still call the shots, we just do what we are told and advocating a draft with that distinct “hope” of riots and protests is not a good reason for it.

"Good to see you coming around on the draft. I've described those in the military and the civilian world they protect as two separate tribes drifting past each other on ice floes, nearby, common language, but increasingly isolated from each other ... to neither’s benefit. And your military 'casts' has developed a sense of entitlement, a belief in its superiority that border on arrogance.-

Sigh, that old canard again Ducky? Really? Arrogant and entitled? You are like a one trick pony at times, we need a draft but not for anything you have mentioned yet. As for the isolation, culturally that will not change Ducky, people who get drafted and stay in the Military will still for the most part tend to be conservative in nature and those that do get out will more likely have a bit of a different view on life itself, i.e.; the Military will have more of an effect on the people coming in via a draft than the people coming in via a draft will have on it. I am for it out of a needed sense of duty and what I, (in my arrogant ways ;) ), perceive as a dis-connect from our leaders due to the people that are going into the military starting to come more and more from the same population and out of a sense of what I think Americans should have as a duty to serve their country.

Ducky, I am not sure where the bitterness about the current military comes from, not sure where the mindset that we somehow run things comes from or even where you think we can somehow go back the days of being an isolationist country anymore but I would suggest you take a few wraps off and maybe look at the big picture and look at our history in a little less myopic manner.

As an officer with almost 13 years in and a good bit of time downrange, I see much more clarity in Ducky's viewpoint than I do in yours Eric. I used to think the way you do but our utter failure to produce any tangible results after years of war has led me to question exactly what we're doing and why. Without a doubt, the biggest security issue the United States faces is our debt and our military is burning through money with no realistic national security strategy to guide it. Our citizens and politicians have totally abdicated their responsibilities by sending the military out with an ill-defined mission and unlikely definition of success and then continued to throw money at the problem while telling the troops that they support them. My definition of success in national defense would be that our country remains a free and prosperous nation for the next 100, 200, 300 etc... years. We will not be if we continue down the road we're on. Yes, we're tactically superior in almost every way to our foes but what has that gained us? A lower casualty rate than we'd otherwise have probably but certainly not victory. Our founders had it right when they rejected the idea of a standing army. If you have it, eventually you're going to use it whether you need to or not. Our once-strengths of industrial capacity, technological superiority and a productive and intelligent citizenry are waning and the smart answer is not to rely on our military strength but to focus on re-creating healthy and robust American industries that are not dependent upon the government. As to being mercenaries, we’re certainly closer to that than we are selfless patriots. If our force did consist of selfless patriots, we’d be willing to fight for a just cause for free.

You have got to be kidding, fight for free? Even the lads in the Revolution did not do that. Find me a guy who joined the combat arms for pay alone? So, I'll ask you the same thing, when we had all volunteer forces prior to now were they Mercs too? Your argument does not hold up under scrutiny-Did I miss the huge pay checks we get? Did I miss the overtime we get? Did I miss the comp time we get? Did I miss that we are not under a far more strict set of laws than the Civilian Citizen is? (An AF O just got sentenced to jail for lewd texts and pics sent to subordinates, think that would happen in the civilian world?) You call us Mercs? So, I can leave at anytime I want? Fight for the highest bidder?

As for the rest of your post, great, what the heck does any of that have to do with the military? We do not dictate policy or strategy, we just do what we are told, saying you lost faith in the Military due to what is going on OEF or OIF does not make sense, while I will NEVER defend the Flag Officers, placing blame on them for one President ignoring a war we should have been in for a war of choice is like blaming a Dog for what it's master tells it to do. If you want to say that we should bring back a draft to maybe make sure that our Political Leaders should do military service so that they do not lose touch with the ground truth of what they are doing when the commit troops to war, then I would agree. The rest of what you are saying in your post really does not hold up. The Military does not drive wars, where we go, who we fight or what we do, if that changed, please tell me when it did that, I would like to get the Power Point from that brief. Yes, I am being snarky but you guys are talking about something that really has nothing to do with us and more to do with the people we keep electing to office. I wish we did do all the things you talk of as far industry and what not but talk to DC, your blame is seriously misplaced.

Otter, although when retiree hits 65, he/she goes on Medicare as you say. Tri-Care (TFL) still remains, acting as the second payer, and when care is not covered under Medicare, but covered under TFL, then TFL will cough-up.

By the way, when I shipped-over, I got 450 bucks and a hardy hand shake from the old man who then sounded liberty call. Where upon I commenced to follow a carefully crafted operation order involving a weekend of debauchery only exceeded in history by Caligula. . .what money was left over on Monday, I squandered on health and comfort items.

Incidentally, speaking of tax dollars: don't you have a work-up to attend to? There seems to be a lot of free time for skylarking on the blog? : )

First off, if we would invade a fun country like Australia or some place and we were allowed to have girls and booze and maybe not get yelled at for having a bloody dog around and not wearing a freaking relfector belt then I would gladly give up the SRBs!

Second, yeah, you can get coverage from TriCare for Life if YOU elect to get it and you are still paying for it, not the same as Free Health Care which a lot of folks seem to think we still get and has not been around since Reagan.

Third, I am on standby, our dwell time is being monitored now and we are training as much we can but we got a break because we already did a mini-deployment (4 months)and our official work up is over, still going to wind up doing about 13 months deployed from Sept 10'-Feb 12' and not including a 3 month gig in OIF in a freaking JOC that just about drove me batty spring of 10' and none of the places I have been had ladies, bars or anything that smacked of your Roman style adventure!! I would never come home if we could fight, come home to base afterwards with a bar, girls and good food! It would be Valhalla! lol

To begin with Otter, we don't go to country's we know something about; only to those we don't. Thus, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, perhaps Yemen (if you think Iraq was one big ordnance bunker, Yemen will hold a surprise). So suck on some mixed-gas and be happy.

Next, a slight nuance: there is no actual enrollment in TFL. You enroll in Medicare Part B via Social Security, and then once Medicare Part A, and B coverage is confirmed in the DEERS, you should be TRICARE for Life eligible with no more co-pays.

Lastly, you should strive for 30 years of service, albeit I only did 28-1/2, but I was selfish and I know you‘re not. What I need from you is to keep Social Security shored-up so I can keep my life style going.

Salut, mon gars (so long matey)! : )

"To begin with Otter, we don't go to country's we know something about; only to those we don't. Thus, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, perhaps Yemen (if you think Iraq was one big ordnance bunker, Yemen will hold a surprise)."-See that is a big complaint of mine, why can't we invade a nice place or some spot that at least has some fun areas to R&R in? Is asking for a few hot chicks on a beach with umbrella adorned drinks to much? ;)

"So suck on some mixed-gas and be happy."- Harsh Ty, Harsh.

"Next, a slight nuance: there is no actual enrollment in TFL. You enroll in Medicare Part B via Social Security, and then once Medicare Part A, and B coverage is confirmed in the DEERS, you should be TRICARE for Life eligible with no more co-pays."-I will have to check that out, my understanding was that it was just like additional insurance and you have a window to enroll in it. Thanks, I have a ways to go to worry about that though :)

"Lastly, you should strive for 30 years of service, albeit I only did 28-1/2, but I was selfish and I know you‘re not. What I need from you is to keep Social Security shored-up so I can keep my life style going."- I am all for Social Security brother, just not in it's current form, it won't last and neither will my body last for 30 years! ;)

went a dong way in the RVN>>>

BEARCAT, you’re going to get the F-35A (USAF) and ‘C’ (USN) whether they are overweight or not. Gate’s has put the ‘B’ (vertical take off capability) on probation over the next two years. My guess it doesn’t make the cut. These planes are what’s on the drawing board not only for the US but also for a host of allied nations who are re-equipping their navies and air forces around this aircraft. Nothing else is on the drawing board and even if there were it would take ten years to get a prototype and another ten to begin production.

My view is that we should cancel the F-35B’s for the Marines and let them have the F-18E that is still in production and an excellent aircraft that is perfectly adequate for their primary mission. They should also re-open production of the A-10 attack aircraft for the Marines. The Brits have cancelled their order for the F-35B and have substituted the Navy’s F-35C as a better plane at a better price.

The CXV is ridiculous at $12 billion plus a copy. What the US should do is to build a new generation of 60,000 ton carriers rather than the 100,000 ton CXV and build more of the them. Of the current carrier fleet we have eleven but one is out of commission for three years for refueling and complex overhaul. Out of the remaining ten carrier battle groups we currently deploy only three. The rest are in training up, returning from deployments, or in PIA maintenance. If we had fifteen to sixteen 60,000-ton carriers we might on average be able to keep five to six on station at any given time. This gives planners much more flexibility without loss of capability. New smaller carriers with a mix of UAV’s and F-35C’s would likely generate more combat capability than a current 100,000 Nimitz class and its air group.

“I don't think military personnel have anything to complain about when it comes to pay and allowances.”-Who is complaining JTINSC? You seem to be the only doing that. How is your pay less than a retiree of today, did I mis-read what a COLA is? Did you take the wrong retirement coming out? What am I missing here? The TIME magazine author is complaining and I pretty much backed up my POV with numbers, please tell me how I am off on that?

“I am a retiree and I am not complaining”-Umm…..I would read your posts again if I were you.

As for DoD costs near the breaking point, the Military Budget is about 50% of the discretionary budget, entitlements account for 60% of the overall budget right now, the DoD budget pales in comparison.

“I do believe that the high pay enjoyed by modern military personnel has in effect made them into Praetorians, or what we might call mercenaries”- Is it me or am I the only one out of you and Ducky who knows what a mercenary is?

“The way I look at is if my rank equivalent today made what I made back in the 70s and 80s (inflation adjusted, of course), I wonder if he'd be so anxious to hang around and lend credence to the never ending wars”- again, am I missing something here? Do you think people stay in the military for cash?! Honestly, what goes on in your and Ducky’s minds? I and many like me can make far more in the civilian sector or did I miss the fact that I do not get overtime, comp-time, work 7 days a week usually around 12+ hours a day and that is if I am in a TOC, if I am operational it is a lot more man hours, so I do it for the cash?! Lol

“Especially in view of the problems you have with actually getting the job done.”-You mean the way you guys handled Vietnam and Korea? Also, I could swear that we still do not make the strategic calls, pretty sure that civilians make those calls but again you and Ducky seem to know something I do not, I guess we in the Military are making the calls now and “Seven Days in May” happened and secretly the Pentagon is in charge, give me a second though, gotta put my tin foil hat on before I type anymore, don’t want “them” to know where I am ;) By the way, at the Tactical Level, where we do make the actual calls we are pretty much crushing it. Thanks though, I will take you council on board.

“I also think you need to recognize the role military personnel play in prolonging these wars that cost the nation so dearly.”-Umm…again, did I miss the meeting? When did we start making the calls on where we go, when we go, who we fight and what we do? Seriously, if you and Ducky are read in on this stuff I would appreciate a memo telling me where I can get a brief on it.

“Sorry, Otter, you guys today are very well paid. I don't resent your inflated income, but I wish you wouldn't complain so much:-Umm…again…TIME Magazine complained, you and Ducky complain about how much we make, I just point out that how much we are paid (with real numbers) and why and then argue that those who think we are overpaid are wrong, so how am I complaining again? Lastly, you and Ducky seem to be nothing but resentful of today’s military and I am curious as to where this anger and lack of knowledge of how the military operates today comes from?

Nuclear technology aboard ship is no more complex (and is often much less complex) than what you find other places aboard ship. The legacy of Rickover is over-engineering, making stuff sailor proof. And the majority of systems are standard mechanical and electrical stuff you would find in any engine room, pumps, valves, breakers and relays. The electronics are often less complex than than those found in radar and aboard aircraft. There's a tendency to stay with systems and electronics proven reliable over time. Maintenance of equipment is not the issue. Operation of equipment, the reactor and other systems directly affecting reactor power, pressure and coolant inventory, is the rub. How complex is it to operate a radar?

It's great pay for all these guys (myself included) but guess what mofos? Why don't you ask the Fukushima [sp?] 50 about what they got paid before... or any of the residents of Fort Sam's burn ward. Pay is great, right up until something - like a tsunami or IED - goes wrong. Then I suppose you really earn it (note my deep tone of sarcasm and bitterness).

Kwitcherbitchin, the recruiter is just down the street. YOU TOO can make big money in the service if you feel so strongly that we make too much.

BTW, regarding contractors, they don't get paid all that great in the end either. They get treated as third class citizens on posts, and they don't even have the right or means to defend themselves. Also should something happen to them they and their family are quite likely to be left in the lurch. You couldn't pay me enough to be a deployed contractor....but it all sounds good on paper.

Civilian reactor operators are examined in a simulator every five or six weeks as well as in an annual operating exam in a simulator and a written re-qualification exam every two years. And the first time you make a mistake on shift, the most minor of errors, you're pulled off. In other words, your job is literally always on the line. Perfection is stressful - and expensive.