Community Discussions
Explore the latest discussions and community conversations related to this domain.
The current State of the department of Defense
Main Post: The current State of the department of Defense
Top Comment: Kegseth is scared of anyone not his color or gender. He’s a goddamn wuss.
Defense Secretary is ruining the US military
Main Post:
By getting rid of up to 60,000 civilians is going to hurt the military. These are people that work at the commissary, child day care centers, fitness centers, housing offices, DFAS, MWR programs, Medical, Dental, Supply, Logistics, building maintenance. It’s because of civilians the military is able to keep continuity with military leaving every 3-5 years.
Hegseth would be the type of Flag Officer that would expect you to shave in the battlefield after you’ve been in combat for a week. https://www.post-gazette.com/news/politics-nation/2025/03/18/pentagon-civilian-jobs-resignations-doge-hegseth-trump-musk/stories/202503180067
Top Comment: Enola Gay and Biplanes are DEI
[META] What is your opinion about CredibleDefense?
Main Post:
As someone who lurking in this sub, warcollege and r/credibledefense. I want to ask people on here to see if it's just my feelings, but do you think r/credibledefense has changed? I started reading on here and that sub+ warcollege. Warcollege is the same, this sub also seem to just as chaotic as usual, but r/credibledefense used to be very neutral politically, with mostly discussion about military technical matters. However, recently It seemingly more biased towards a certain political agenda, with users that used to post with different perspectives such as Duncan-M or Glider become inactive. Is something changed in the moderation policy? I'm asking this because it's very sad for me to lost a quality subreddits to read about aspects that i like such as military and politics.
Top Comment: Natural consequence of squeezing all users into a single place with only daily discussion threads. Pre-daily thread r/CD was really good back then. Turns out, the posting quality of the most terminally online users out there aren't much better than other subreddits. You don't usually see 100% of someone's braindead takes because they're split up across multiple posts but you can't choose to avoid them in r/CD like you can elsewhere by only looking at post titles. The daily thread essentially acts like a normal subreddit, but each top level comment is a 200 word + editorialised title for a link or someone's daily agenda text post. Edit: There's a reason why many subreddits have "Don't Editorialize Submission Titles" rules. It generally improves post quality by a lot. For obvious reasons, you don't get the same benefit when users can post 200 word editorials with an attached link.
The Department of Defense is in deep💩
Main Post:
Two days ago on March 22, AP News reported that Pentagon leaders were looking for leaks of national security information and that Defense Department personnel could face polygraph tests to find such leaks.
However, Trump administration leaders to include Hegseth are the cause of their own problems using Signal.
Hegseth texted in the group chat “Reestablish deterrence, which Biden cratered. But, we can easily pause. And if we do, I will do all we can to enforce 100% OPSEC”
Here is where becomes complete BS. A military team to do this would be screwed. Their lives will be completely ruined along with their families. To these guys, it’s no big deal.
Top Comment: I was at the CENTCOM CAPC last year and helped plan the strikes carried out during that time. If I or anybody at the CAOC did this, it would easily be the biggest fuck up of our entire career.
How would you explain defense in depth?
Main Post: How would you explain defense in depth?
Top Comment: The very simple answer is that a defense in depth is designed to spread available troops over multiple defensive lines within a single sector, rather than keeping the bulk of the troops forward (to prevent loss of ground) or rearward (to counterattack). With this system loss of territory is expected and, in fact, counted on. The goal is to minimize friendly losses via dispersal, introduce a lot of friction into the enemy plan, and ensure that the enemy does not achieve a breakthrough of the defences. It is probably the best strategy to have the most favourable casualty ratio for the defender, while also being good for preventing a breakthrough. The downside is that this approach also almost always results in some loss of territory.