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.
FYI... The Marine Corps Commandant reports directly to the Admiral of the US Navy.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.
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
As long as they keep the Umbrella corporation away from us I am good.Maybe the Guardians will team up with the Nova Corps to defend Xandar from Ronan the Accuser and his army of Sakaarans.
It is still less than was spent on the Affordable Care Act Website. The WEBSITE.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!
I am not one of the ridiculers (sp), however I am a Coastie. Served six years.To those that are ridiculing the Space Force. In what branch did you serve your country?
None. So what?To those that are ridiculing the Space Force. In what branch did you serve your country?
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.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.
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.
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.FYI... The Marine Corps Commandant reports directly to the Admiral of the US Navy.
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."
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.)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.
I lied; I do disagree with this one thing. It's not a good question. It shouldn't be a question at all.Does it make your opinion more or less valid? Good question.
It is indeed. Diversity of viewpoints at the table is always good.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.
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.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.
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
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?Air Force = AirmanWhat term is suitably less pretentious, but also descriptive?
Console jockies? Satellite shepherds? Watchdogs?
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?
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.
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
so, would a person in recruit training be a "space cadet"???
Enter your email address to join: