Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lksteve
you forgot to mention Hawthorne NV...of course, even if the base stayed open, it sucks to be in Hawthorne NV...
|
Actually, Hawthorne is pretty neat.
Great place for practicing high angle shooting, as LR 1947 can attest.
The thing that concerns me is that in consideration of a small savings over time, and a large expense in cleaning up and returning bases, we lose the ability to expand in the event of a major future requirement.
Can you imagine having to buy land for and build bases today like we did in WW II? The environmental impact studies alone would take forever.
We also lose the exposure these bases provide for positive impact on the communities. Many kids today have never seen a servicemenber in real life, let alone had one for a neighbor, a coach, etc.
Some of these decisions make no sense at all. Realigning Pope AFB and McChord AFB, two of the bases that support Army installations and their rapid deployments? Moving an SFG from one of the largest Army bases in the world, home of USASOC and the SF Schoolhouse to go to an AF base with no real infrastructure to support SF training or deployment requirements? I guess AFSOC will finally have a real FID capability. Looks like some pretty stupid decisions to me.
Finally, we further concentrate our resources in fewer and fewer baskets, making targeting much easier for those who would oppose us.
I would favor mothballing and realigning bases, with no closure. That preserves the resources, removes the cost of clean-ups, and allows for a return if future requirements arise.
TR