"Bayonets and Horses"

Obama's comment was stupid. But more to the point, you can't keep pouring more and more missions onto the Navy (or other services) while continually cutting their capabilities.

The following was originally posted as part of a Facebook discussion.

by Rod D. Martin
October 24, 2012

It is just a fact that we today deploy 3X as many bayonets as in the time stated, just as it is a fact that our Special Operators led the conquest of Afghanistan in October-November 2001 from horseback. And it wouldn't really matter if we have half as many bayonets as you suggest, since the repeatedly self-proclaimed "I'm the Commander in Chief" doesn't know what standard issue weaponry is for the service which is sent in first and pulled out last.

That's just absolutely disgraceful all by itself. And it's also what happens when you're being fed lines by Michael Moore and Martin Sheen instead of, er, doing the job of the Commander in Chief.

As to the Navy: your theory [that advanced technology means we can greatly reduce the number of warships] might make some sense in a stand-up battle like Jutland, but doesn't really help so much against (a) large numbers of small littoral craft such a…