by Ryan Thomason

Created on: May 22, 2008   Last Updated: October 08, 2008

This country was founded by volunteers and militias outnumbered, untrained, and under-supplied.

Take a look at the how the US military stands now and you'll see that it's been moved into the opposite direction, with maybe an exception to under-supplied in some circumstances. Currently, the US Military is large, bloated, and draining resources like never before. With current modern warfare, the US military is fighting its battles in costly ways that can easily be fixed.

Take a look at the military missile arsenal, targets can be attacked from hundreds and in some cases thousands of miles away. The "Shock and Awe" campaign of the Second Iraq War showed the world that government infrastructures can easily be taken down and disrupt the Chain of Command in a matter of hours. Giving land forces an easier task of assuming control on the ground after an attack. Land forces make up a large bulk of the US Military, which also makes it the biggest drain on resources. What if you were to dramatically shrink the size of the land forces, what type of savings would the military get? You'd have a lot less soldiers drawing pensions, or receiving funds for being injured for starters. With so many less mouths to feed, spending on food supplies would cut costs. But, what to do with the access money gained from a large reduction in forces?

Specialization of forces is what you do with the extra money. Instead of having such a large, jack of all trades' standing army. Why not funnel the extra money that you get from decreasing the size to applying it toward training a few highly trained, highly technological battalions? If you look over the course of history, most technological advances happened because of a military purpose or functionality. With the current US Military resources, and applying it to adaptation of technology for a smaller, more mobile, efficient military force, the technological advancements may be astounding. Because wars can be fought from far away using precision guided missiles or heavy artillery, doesn't it make sense for a smaller force on the land, equipped to the max with highly advanced technology to aid them on the ground after an assault from the air?

Decreasing the size of the US military is the way of the future, and, modern warfare looks like it might require it. Instead of making a larger standing army, the US Military would be far more useful as a tool if it were to become highly specialized, technological forces. The days of the US Military being rag-tag small volunteer militias are long gone, but should it still be a large rag-tag volunteer force in its place? The world has moved on, advanced, just as when the Polish Horse Calvary fought against the German Tanks in WW2, large freestanding armies should be a thing of the past, it is time to move on.

Learn more about this author, Ryan Thomason.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.