Do we need Two Armies?

Discussion in 'Strategic Defence & Spending Review (SDSR)' started by Canader, Sep 1, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Cat amongst the pigeons time. Here's a good argument put forward a few years ago to deconflict between the USMC and US Army, code for 'mag to grid' the former.

    Do we need 'Two Armies'?

    "The United States has enjoyed the luxury of two overlapping land forces for years, the Army and the Marine Corps. We have two services which see their core business as sustained land operations. Today, we are in the midst of harsh defense cuts. It is time to face the fact that America can no longer afford two armies."

    http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/jfq_pubs/jfq0806.pdf
     
  2. The US system is completely different to ours and based on their utterly metal rules and paranoia.

    I can understand stealing some ideas from the USMC though. A very impressive set up.
     
  3. Spliting the British Army (merging in the RM first) in to a USMC style expeditionary set up and a heavier force could be a workable option.

    Maybe two/three Light Brigades and a suitable reserve component with Commando, Airborne and Light specialist (ie mountain and riverine) Bns Brigaded together. Chuck in a Light Recce mob and some Light Arty and back it up with a CSS regt.
     
  4. Grumblegrunt

    Grumblegrunt LE Book Reviewer

    we should have based the sdsr on the usmc and slashed the rank structure along with all the bollox that comes with it.

    there is no reason why we shouldnt have been capable of fielding 70k combat troops by land, sea or air for the past 2 decades if we had put our minds to task instead of keeping the status quo.

    do we really need 1200 colonels?
     
  5. Grumblegrunt

    Grumblegrunt LE Book Reviewer

    they have ships tanks and planes so everyone should be happy - cept the joint chiefs who would become joint chief
     
  6. Thats a bit like asking why we have the Royal Marines... umm... among other things it includes amphibious assaults on heavily-defended enemy beachheads?

    Not something we're trained to do much in the Infantry is it?
     
  7. Watch the opening scenes of Saving Private Ryan, on the boat, off the boat.
     
  8. Grumblegrunt

    Grumblegrunt LE Book Reviewer

    usmc has sea marines as a different entity with associated air support to match it
     
  9. The USMC relies on the US Navy for ships but has its own vehicles (including armour), logistical support and close air support.
     
  10. rampant

    rampant LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    The ships belong to the USN, I'm beginning to get tired of repeating this point, BUT, the USMC, for all it's brilliance, innovation and martial skill (in which it is near peerless) relies heavily, and I mean heavily, on the USN & USAF for Martime and Airborne transport. To put it simply USMC is UKAF, less Ships (Carriers, destroyers, frigates, minesweepers, survey vessels etc) Hercs, AWACS, Globemaster, Hawk etc etc etc.

    To keep drawing parrallels between UKAF and USMC is strategically, militarily, economically moronic in the extreme. We can learn from or excellent friends (bless the nisguided children) on a tactical level re MEU and MEG.
     
  11. Think of all the hundreds of Brigadiers this idea would put out of a job!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. The downside? We'd have to buy back all the Harriers to make it work properly.
     
  13. Let's be honest jumping in and out of boats(sic) isn't hugely complex. Neither is jumping out of planes or warriors

    It can all be trained in...has any one got the experienced manpower base of trainers to train everyone and the budget and the time....

    I don't ****ing know