And the Space Force Members will Officially be Referred to as................

[Ronz Rocketz]

 

[RobertH3]

Since it's my service and Robert Heinlein said so: no spaceships for the space force. The navy owns those and the Corps gets the power suits!

 

[Woody's Workshop]

Remember, the fighting frequently isn’t won only with rocks or clubs or spears or swords or arrows or bullets or missiles or bombs or lasers or biological or chemical weapons. The fight also involves strategy, knowing where you are , where THEY are, what THEY have available to fight with at the moment, knowing the weather, being able to mass your forces at strategic points at strategic times, and spoofing the enemy to make him think you are somewhere you are not, or have something you don’t.

A critical factor in allied victory in WWII was control of the air. No question, the final victory had to be made on th ground, but the ground campaign had no chance of success until we owned the skies over Europe, and that was done at great cost. Desert Storm was a quick one sided war, partly because the bad guys gave us six months to set up for it, and once we were set up we immediately took control of the skies to allow the ground pounders to perfectly execute their plans.

At Squadron Officer School, one lecturer said that people thought the mission of the Air Force was to break things and kill people. He adjusted that slightly, “the mission of the Air Force is to be ever prepared to break things and kill people in the hopes that, having that capability, the enemy will never challenge us to use it.”

Unlike SciFi movies, Wars in the foreseeable future will not likely be won in space, but CONTROL of space (basically having excellent intelligence and communication, keeping your eyes and ears open, while simultaneously blinding and deafening your opponent) will be critical to victories on the ground, in the water, and in the air. You don’t need to have bombs or lasers in space to effectively fight USING space assets.

The really hard part will be in creating a Space Force that knows how to fight using Space Assets inside and out, and then getting that Force to “Play well in the sandbox“ with Army, Navy, Marine, Air Force, and CIA Assets, training Leaders with the experience to INTEGRATE ALL of these forces, to leverage our full power to “break things and kill people”, again in the (likely unfortunately vain) hope that we never actually have to use it.

Too often we allow pride in our individual services (a good thing) to conflict with out ability to work together to defeat the real enemy.

All good and correct things.
But the name Space Force doesn't fit.
People around the World will see that name and think of Star Trek, Star Wars or some other Sci Fi flick and just laugh at them.
Perhaps the naming was intentional to throw off the unsuspecting public....(really?)
Personally, the name Space Force is a slap in the face to me, but that is no surprise giving the origin.
The branches of the Military that now watch over all the above mentioned items....if the Space Force is going to take over all or part of it, what happens the the well trained personnel that is in place? Switch to the Space Force? Do they keep seniority, retirement benefits?
What is listed above by the BABAR is already being done. We are reinventing the wheel, with this.
IMHO, this didn't need to happen at this time. We automatically see the word Force and we think of a elite group that can and does missions with surgical precision. Space Corps would have been a MUCH better name for them.
Or even Space Watch. But, we are already doing that!
It would be nice to see data on an outline of what they will actually be doing, but I'm sure that is CLASSIFIED.
We will just have to wait and see what the budget looks like for the newly formed Space Force.
Then look into your fridge and panty and ask yourself, Do we really need this...right now? What are they doing that we already don't do?

With this COVID thing mutating and getting worse, more bail out money being spent (nearly a Trillion Dollars) the USA has started a financial black hole and we are going to get eaten up by it.
Mean while, the USA unloads container ships daily from over seas of disposable, cheap junk. Once US money goes off shore, it don't come back.
Remember, little over a year ago a trade agreement was agreed upon and signed. Less than a week later COVID came on the scene. What does that tell you? Just think about it a good long while....

 

[Philip Tiberius D.]

Hum, Marines are not part of the Navy. Not for quite some time now. Although Marine Aviation is tasked with providing aviation assets to the Navy when required.

FYI... The Marine Corps Commandant reports directly to the Admiral of the US Navy.

 

[Bill Hanson]

In a time when people using pressure cooker bombs are accused in court of using WMDs because a pressure cooker bomb can kill several people at once, I think that any weapon which is likely to be effective when placed in space could potentially be construed as a WMD

Isn't that strange how US law is so excessive in its definition of WMD?

18 US Code Section 2332a states that
(2) the term “weapon of mass destruction” means—
(A) any destructive device as defined in section 921 of this title;

18 US Code section 921, defines a "destructive device" as:
(A) any explosive, incendiary, or poison gas—
(i) bomb,
(ii) grenade,
(iii) rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces,
(iv) missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce,
(v) mine, or
(vi) device similar to any of the devices described in the preceding clauses;

Note that explosive and propellant weights are stated in ounces. So, according to those definitions, the British attacked Ft McHenry with WMDs. And, there were indeed plenty of WMD in Iraq -- as there are in all countries.

This is one reason why it behooves us to remain squeaky clean in following the existing rules so we can continue to launch rockets.

 

[RocketGeekInFL]

Maybe the Guardians will team up with the Nova Corps to defend Xandar from Ronan the Accuser and his army of Sakaarans.

As long as they keep the Umbrella corporation away from us I am good.

 

[RocketGeekInFL]

Good Lord.....................
MORE.....Government Spending.
A year to come up with an Emblem, Name and Moto, and for something that just can't exist because they have NO WAY of doing anything space related!
At best, they could run operations inside of "The Mountain" LOL
Just like Buck Rogers, this should be 500 years in the FUTURE!

It is still less than was spent on the Affordable Care Act Website. The WEBSITE.

 

[DWonders]

I wonder if the Air Force caught this much grief when they were first stood up in '47.

 

[Titan II]

To those that are ridiculing the Space Force. In what branch did you serve your country?

 

[teepot]

AF

 

[RocketGeekInFL]

To those that are ridiculing the Space Force. In what branch did you serve your country?

I am not one of the ridiculers (sp), however I am a Coastie. Served six years.

 

[jqavins]

To those that are ridiculing the Space Force. In what branch did you serve your country?

None. So what?

Serving in the military is admiral and something the rest of us should be, and are, grateful to you for, and deserving of our respect. But it does not grant some exclusive right to hold and express opinions on whatever subject. Nor does it grant exclusive rights to enything else except continued use of the title of rank, a pension, and VA benefits. And as I stated, respect and gratitude.

I don't know if this is what you meant, but your question resembles a hot button of mine. One hears now and then words ammounting to "You didn't serve, so you can't be a patriot" or "You didn't serve so shut up", and such statements are deeply offensive.

 

[DWonders]

USAF 20+. Last 4 with Air Force Space Command. Currently DoD contractor (16+ years) supporting AFSPC, USSF and NASA.

 

[BABAR]

None. So what?

Serving in the military is admiral and something the rest of us should be, and are, grateful to you for, and deserving of our respect. But it does not grant some exclusive right to hold and express opinions on whatever subject. Nor does it grant exclusive rights to enything else except continued use of the title of rank, a pension, and VA benefits. And as I stated, respect and gratitude.

I don't know if this is what you meant, but your question resembles a hot button of mine. One hears now and then words ammounting to "You didn't serve, so you can't be a patriot" or "You didn't serve so shut up", and such statements are deeply offensive.

You are of course correct, not withstanding the fact that it is BECAUSE of those in the military now and who have gone before that you DO have a right to express your opinion. Does it make your opinion more or less valid? Good question.

During the President Clinton years, President Clinton and Secretary of State Albright were discussing military intervention in Bosnia. Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Stage General Powell asked them, “What is the exit strategy” for military intervention. Neither the President or the Secretary of State had one. Secretary Albright is said to have responded, however, “What is the point of having a military if you aren’t going to use it?” But she had never been in combat, and didn’t have a clue what it meant to have worry about possibly about you, your friends, or those under your command dying and leaving your (or their) wives widows and kids fatherless (and the appropriate terms for spouses of women soldiers, marines, sailors, airmen, and guardians.). I am not saying, “Never use the military,” only “Never use the military without deep consideration of the value of the goals, the probability of success, and the possibility of fecal-turbine interaction.”

I am glad we have a civilian government and that the military is under civilian control. I don’t think the military should ever CALL the shots, but I do believe the military opinions should be consulted and strongly considered whenever we put American lives on the line. I am disturbed that the number of U.S. Senators with prior military experience has gone from 81 % in 73 to. 19% in 2019.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/02/15/the-changing-face-of-congress/
BTW, I was also one that posted some humor regarding the term “Guardian.” I think humor in the military is a good thing, in fact now that I have actually deployed as a medic, heard the explosions personally, and seen men hurt and die in front of me, I think hanging on to humor is essential, without it we couldn’t go on (it’s important in the medical world, too!)

I’m not saying Vets are always right (we most definitely are NOT!). But our point of view is different, and it is important that we be “at the table” when decisions are made.

Okay, I still think “Guardians” for USSF has unfortunately come out on the heels of a fun pair of movies using the term DIFFERENTLY, and I think it’s funny. I think it is going to work out really well in the end, though.

 

[modeltrains]

Hum, Marines are not part of the Navy. Not for quite some time now. Although Marine Aviation is tasked with providing aviation assets to the Navy when required.

FYI... The Marine Corps Commandant reports directly to the Admiral of the US Navy.

I'm the kind of person who looks at this kind of conversation and doesn't understand why no participants are immediately going to the source for documentation.

So, let's go see what the DoD says about the issue; "straight from the (sea)horse's mouth" so to speak,

So, maritime knowledge has always been a critical part of being a marine, but the U.S. Marine Corps hasn’t always been part of the U.S. Navy.
Until 1834, the Marines were an independent service. President Andrew Jackson wanted to make the Corps part of the Army. However, the Marine Corps commandant at the time, Archibald Henderson, had proven that Marines were important in landing party operations, not just ship-to-ship battles, so Congress decided to put the Navy and Marine Corps into one department, forever linking these two "sister services."

https://www.defense.gov/Explore/Features/story/Article/1763150/why-are-marines-part-of-the-navy/

 

[jqavins]

BABAR, I don't disagree with any of what you wrote, and have only a few small comments to make.

You are of course correct, not withstanding the fact that it is BECAUSE of those in the military now and who have gone before that you DO have a right to express your opinion.

Just to be claer, what I meant by "right" was less about the legal right than the broader entitlement to these things. ("Entitlement" has taken on some negative connotations lately; I hope you understand what I'm saying.) I should think that those who have placed themselves at risk to secure that right, in both senses, might be less prone denegrate the exercise of that right, even by those who did not serve. (Which is not what you, BABAR, are doing here.)

Does it make your opinion more or less valid? Good question.

I lied; I do disagree with this one thing. It's not a good question. It shouldn't be a question at all.

I’m not saying Vets are always right (we most definitely are NOT!). But our point of view is different, and it is important that we be “at the table” when decisions are made.

It is indeed. Diversity of viewpoints at the table is always good.

I fear I'm guilty of taking this a step closer to the sort of arguing that TRF is so good at avoiding. So that is the last I'll write on the subject.

But on a slightly different subject...

Okay, I still think “Guardians” for USSF has unfortunately come out on the heels of a fun pair of movies using the term DIFFERENTLY, and I think it’s funny. I think it is going to work out really well in the end, though.

The movie comparrison is actually not the first reason that came to me that "Guardians" is a bad term. As I've stated previously, soldier, sailor, airman, and marine accurately describe members of their respective branches, and only of those branches. Soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marimes are all guardians of the freedoms we all enjoy. Intelligence analysts and operatives, diplomats, and the military's civilian governers are guardians of our freedoms. The production workers and engineers who provide the hardware and software that our military needs (which is something I have been, though briefly) are guardians of our freedom. Those who put themselves in harms way deserve the term the most. All of them. To use "guardian" as the term for just one branch is less comical than it is pretentious, stupid, and insulting to the guardians in the other branches.

 

[Nytrunner]

To use "guardian" as the term for just one branch is less comical than it is pretentious, stupid, and insulting to the guardians in the other branches

What term is suitably less pretentious, but also descriptive?

Console jockies? Satellite shepherds? Watchdogs?

 

[KC3KNM]

Air Force = Airman
Space Force = Spaceman

 

[FreeFlighter]

Now, there will actually be Guardians Of The Galaxy! AWESOME!

 

[jqavins]

What term is suitably less pretentious, but also descriptive?

Console jockies? Satellite shepherds? Watchdogs?

Air Force = Airman
Space Force = Spaceman

Spaceman (spaceperson)? Spacer? Spacefarer? Orbiter? Leo? Perhaps the fact that it's so hard to pick a term is an indicator that the missionis ill defined?

 

[boatgeek]

Spaceman (spaceperson)? Spacer? Spacefarer? Orbiter? Leo? Perhaps the fact that it's so hard to pick a term is an indicator that the missionis ill defined?

This.

 

[dhbarr]

Skyballs

 

[modeltrains]

Guardians has a connection to US Space Force which goes back over 2 decades,
https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/101681350

Guardians of the high frontier.

Language(s):	English
Published:	[Peterson AFB, Colo.] : Air Force Space Command, [1996?]
Subjects:	Astronautics, Military. Guided missiles. Guided missile ranges.
Physical Description:	23 p. : col. ill., col. maps ; 28 cm.

 

[modeltrains]

And while posting references that no one here actually cares enough to go find because all you actually want to do is hear yourself talk, have a look at bottom of page 61 of this from 2005,
https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a593645.pdf

Dear Space Professional Colleague, High Frontier, the Journal for Space and Missile Professionals, is designed with all of our space professionals in mind across the Department of Defense, the National Security Space community, our friends in Congress and partners in industry. We are interested in what you think of High Frontier and request your feedback. ... We hope you enjoy this edition and will make future editions part of your professional reading library. LANCE W. LORD General, USAF Commander, Air Force Space Command GUARDIANS OF THE HIGH FRONTIER

 

[RocketT.Coyote]

Now a mascot needs to be selected. My vote is for a certain cybernetically-enhanced raccoon.

 

[Nytrunner]

Now a mascot needs to be selected. My vote is for a certain cybernetically-enhanced raccoon.

Taken

 

[Philip Tiberius D.]

+1

 

[cbrarick]

so, would a person in recruit training be a "space cadet"???

BTW I was in the Navy.

 

[afadeev]

so, would a person in recruit training be a "space cadet"???

I am afraid, not.
I believe the term you are looking for is <kinder-guardian>.

Training will include practice with:

• GunnyRabit
• RocketShip RPG
• BFF

Remember - aim at the head & shoulder, not the toes!

 

[Vitruvius]

At RocketT.Coyote. Amen, Brother, mine too!