• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Space military branch - Navy or Air Force?

Which branch should a space military branch be based on?

  • Total voters
    42
In most Science Fiction stories/movies that I have read/seen, the space military forces are organized much like current naval forces.


It just makes sense....

Assuming your space military forces are running around in large ships that require a large number of crewmembers, that is.

Such is very similar to how naval forces function currently.

By that measure, even if USAF continues to be in charge of space, I suspect that when or if (decades or centuries from now) large ships with high crew requirements are in use, they will need to be organized in a way similar to today’s naval forces.
 
Our military needs to be updated, its the 21st century. We do NOT need separate divisions..One military is sufficient, not 4 or 5 or 6 ...
 
Assuming it were to happen the Air Force already has a Space Command. However more likely they would create a 5th military branch with a complete level and layer of bureaucracy.
 
earthworm said:
Our military needs to be updated, its the 21st century. We do NOT need separate divisions..One military is sufficient, not 4 or 5 or 6 ...
Click to expand...
Each branch has it's own, specific mission. Intermingling them would make us less flexible in many ways.
 
earthworm said:
Our military needs to be updated, its the 21st century. We do NOT need separate divisions..One military is sufficient, not 4 or 5 or 6 ...
Click to expand...

Really, we just need like one dude... 100m tall with lasers and firebreath. Or a Death Star.
 
ecofarm said:
Really, we just need like one dude... 100m tall with lasers and firebreath. Or a Death Star.
Click to expand...

Can I borrow your water pipe, and have some of your brownies?
 
MoSurveyor said:
Each branch has it's own, specific mission. Intermingling them would make us less flexible in many ways.
Click to expand...
How so ?
And, I'd think that the mission should all be the same..
This idea involves cooperation - people working together as a team..
We need less bureaucracy....
 
There is no water nor air in space, but it still makes most sense for the Navy to be the model.

When an Air Force pilot ejects, he can breathe and parachute to territory that (usually) can provide food and water until he's rescued. If a sailor dives off in sinking ship, he's in a hostile element. Maybe he can breathe, if he's not drowned first. He won't be able to eat, and he shouldn't drink the water if he doesn't want to die in misery. Essentially, without immediate rescue, the sailor will die. This proves the sea is a hostile element, just like a vacuum. The Navy knows how to operate in a hostile element and that's why the Navy should be in charge in space.

Smaller vessels should also be under the Navy. They are little different from the aircraft operated from a carrier. Again, even small ships operating in vacuum operate in a hostile environment and the Navy is better at handling that.

Troops operating from space ships should be handled by the Marines. They know best how to operate ship-to-ship and ship-to-surface.

The Army can continue, but they'll just guard things that the Marines have already pacified, just like how we do it now.

*ahem*
 
I say navy as well.

They are the most capable at long distance travel over extended periods of time. A parallel can be drawn between a journey across the sea in the 15th century and a journey to a distant solar system at some unspecified time in the future. Maintaining a crew, discipline, supplies, navigation, etc... everything the Navy does now would translate well.

The airforce could be the orbital defense type folks, who respond to emergencies with hitting power where relatively short distances are involved.
 
earthworm said:
Our military needs to be updated, its the 21st century. We do NOT need separate divisions..One military is sufficient, not 4 or 5 or 6 ...
Click to expand...


Funny thing about that; when our nation was conceived, we did have one military, the Navy...
That did not last long ; to be bureaucratic - the nature of man..
 
earthworm said:
How so ?
And, I'd think that the mission should all be the same..
This idea involves cooperation - people working together as a team..
We need less bureaucracy....
Click to expand...
In the military it's not "bureaucracy", it's a chain of command, and they really aren't the same thing. Air power and the projection of air power is a far different subject than land power or sea power. Each has it's own unique challenges and optimal configurations. The Airforce doesn't need sub tenders and the Navy has little use for a C-5 Galaxy.


I wouldn't want someone trained in aerial combat to start making decisions about naval tactics. Bad, bad idea.
 
Last edited:
There is water in space, it's where all the water on this planet came from. The problem is it arrives in solid form...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom