Abolish the Air Force

[Ender]

Using my "billion dollar brain," let me tell you that you might want to use yours to open a book about Marine Corps history. It is only recently that the Corps hasn't had to justify its existance.

I happen to own a book or two about the Marine Corps and have actually managed to open one or two over the years. Lawyers (the bulk of which were probably Dept. of the Navy JAG) may very well have had to fight Congress over the years for appropriations or territorial reasons but justifying oneself to an enemy bureaucrat or a politician is a far cry from doing the same to yourself or to the American people. Smalls Wars may very well mean the employment of pens and lawyers in raids on Congress to some but to me at the end of the day all of our theoretical posturing and postulating on the subject of SW comes down to bullets and bad-guys. Someone is responsible for them and when the E-3 cares more about where big bullets are landing than the 0-3 who launched them, I think something is wrong.

It is my opinion that even "back in the day" Marines have always had a sense that the world needed them, Congress, the money grubbers and popular opinion be damned. Also I feel there is a small difference between:
-"Justifying" yourself officially for what? 232 years now by standing on the birth of a nation, (gently: where were the pilots then?) solidifying your gain against imperial intentions, securing your borders and your interior, stomping the world in war (twice), protecting every seat of diplomacy on the globe and all while simultaneously responding to every hot spot or flare up this planet has produced and....
-"Justifying" the 60 years the United States Air Force has (some would opine) overwhelmingly fought with its officer cadre,* in a linear (top down, bottom up) one-dimensional environment, with weapons systems that have progressively distanced and sterilized the fighter from the fighting, all while devouring an enormous percentage of a vitally critical defense budget on ever increasingly expensive and complicated solutions to extremely difficult but relatively time-worn and simple problems. That's just me though.

(*A practice which by very definition and execution fosters an elitist environment and promotes a mindset where the pilot is "worth" more than a grunt. Eg: Ask any general who the most valuable person in his Corps is and he will show you a 19 year old with a machine gun, would the Air Force general do the same?)

I have asked a few friends to first read and then comment on Xenophon's original post and not one can honestly come up with a solid answer on what the Air Force does that anyone other branch could not...NASA-space, the Army- rockets, everybody- fixed and rotary wing cap. etc... but in deference to your suggestion and in the spirit of objectivity and "anti-parochialism" I will ask these same friends whether the Marine Corps relativity debate should be raised again just to see what they say... I will keep a straight face, I promise.

Throughout its history, mostly after wars or large engagments, the Corps has had to sell itself in the halls of Congress. Thankfully, at least a few Marines dreamed of justifying the Corps' existence so we still have one..

The key here is that they had to "sell" themselves- not a natural state for a creature who is trained from day one that the product sells itself. I am dreaming for a few Airmen to again, stand up and say "this is the product that we have mastered, this is why you need us and please don't forget it you silly, knuckle-dragging ground pounder...." (I would bow in obeisance and shut up, I promise )

Also, you might want to read [B]Stevely's[B] responses to my post. His reasoning was well though out and well written, which has given me some pause to at least consider his arguments. Your post, on the other hand, is so caustic that I can't really take it seriously. Besides, I've never sought to justify the existence of the AF before, so why would I start now?

I mean no disrespect but I read every word in this thread, including all of what Stevely said (nicely) and everything else that was even remotely related to this subject (both on site and off). You are the first airman to directly respond, (it's fair, I get it, I picked your quote) and whether the tone was palatable for you or not, I can promise you I meant no personal offense to you or any airman on here.

However... I feel, as do others, that behind my unpolished delivery are some very salient points and the underlying core of Xenophon's post raises some (at the very least) thought provoking questions. We can choose to avoid the serious questions for the sake of not wanting to mix it up, (Can't we all just get along?) or for the sake of wanting to avoid service oriented parochialism (how many times has that word been used in reference to this topic?) but our desire for a warm, fuzzy, Downy Soft Joint relationship will not become realized by (forgive me man) dreaming or agreeing, it is going to come from us asking hard questions and giving hard answers of and to one another. I believe we NEED to practice on ourselves (as iron strengthens iron) if we are going to take it to the enemy in earnest...I see it as kind of like the Irish with wooden swords or the Mafia with rubber bullets in my mind... so if the intent is to prove what you, the air force can do for us, the guy on the ground then please SELL ME, in spite of my relative acidity level and or generally (mis)directed cynicism.

Now I am not as skilled in the art of euphemistic employment as others and I have never claimed to be as talented with the scalpel as I am with the broadsword, (read: M2, 4, 9, 16, 203, 240G or 249) but I think the SWC's ROEs and our own sense of warrior propriety can see a way to duke this one out in a manner that speaks well to both of our character's. No one has spanked me on here yet (there are enough senior Marines on here and if I were way off base I trust [KNOW] someone would have kicked me back in my lane) and I am not trying to be the flamer but it is my impression, after having read and reread the flow of the thread that the real essence of the debate has been derailed for the sake of pride and everyone wanting to play gently and not stoop to "parochial" tussles... Frankly, I think we are made of tougher stuff than that. I smacked you guys, please don't prove my fears well-founded by at least not politely smacking me back with something of substance.

Frankly, I know I am not the only person who has quite caustically wondered about the United States Air Force, wondered about all of the pools you will neither avow nor disavow, wondered why a tabletop tactical discussion with an Air Force Colonel on the subject of (just) Iraq REALLY comes down to whether or not it would be a good idea "to just turn em all into a giant sheet of irradiated glass." I know I am not the only one who wonders why the higher rank a soldier, salior or Marine becomes, the FEWER weapons he personally wields. Hell, our biggest weapons seem to be operated (responsibly) by our most junior warriors; in the Air Force it seems to be the other way around or as though you don't REALLY get your hands on the big toys until you hit at least 50...

Devil, you know as well as I, all of the rumors about the Marine Corps are true. We fight, drink, swear, are generally ill-tempered and I really just want someone to tell me all the rumors about the Air Force (Air Force is to Lawyer as...) are not true and that there really is a distinct capability or aspect the Big Blue brings to the fight that no other branch could do as well or better with the same monies....