OT: question: US military size, prewar

Gamers can also use this forum to chat about any game related subject, news, rumours etc.

Moderator: maddog986

User avatar
mlees
Posts: 2263
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 6:14 am
Location: San Diego

OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by mlees »

I thought I read somewhere that the size of the US Army in 1939 was smaller than Greece (or was it Portugal?). Can someone point me towards an online reference as to the numbers of folks in uniform (USA) pre-WW2?

Thanks!
herwin
Posts: 6047
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 9:20 pm
Location: Sunderland, UK
Contact:

RE: OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by herwin »

ORIGINAL: mlees

I thought I read somewhere that the size of the US Army in 1939 was smaller than Greece (or was it Portugal?). Can someone point me towards an online reference as to the numbers of folks in uniform (USA) pre-WW2?

Thanks!

See http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/wwii/usarmy/default.aspx.

The thing to remember about Greece was that it was a military dictatorship with large unfriendly neighbours.
Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com
User avatar
USSAmerica
Posts: 19198
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2002 4:32 am
Location: Graham, NC, USA
Contact:

RE: OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by USSAmerica »

ORIGINAL: mlees

I thought I read somewhere that the size of the US Army in 1939 was smaller than Greece (or was it Portugal?). Can someone point me towards an online reference as to the numbers of folks in uniform (USA) pre-WW2?

Thanks!

I can't point you to a reference, but I do recall hearing that the size of the US Army was smaller than Poland's in 1939.
Mike

"Good times will set you free" - Jimmy Buffett

"They need more rum punch" - Me

Image
Artwork by The Amazing Dixie
herwin
Posts: 6047
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 9:20 pm
Location: Sunderland, UK
Contact:

RE: OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by herwin »

ORIGINAL: USS America

ORIGINAL: mlees

I thought I read somewhere that the size of the US Army in 1939 was smaller than Greece (or was it Portugal?). Can someone point me towards an online reference as to the numbers of folks in uniform (USA) pre-WW2?

Thanks!

I can't point you to a reference, but I do recall hearing that the size of the US Army was smaller than Poland's in 1939.

Poland was another military dictatorship with large unfriendly neighbours. See a pattern?
Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com
anarchyintheuk
Posts: 3946
Joined: Wed May 05, 2004 7:08 pm
Location: Dallas

RE: OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by anarchyintheuk »

Greece and Poland were bordered by countries a little more dangerous to them than Canada and Mexico were to the US.

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/COS ... ial-1.html
Chris21wen
Posts: 6949
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2002 10:00 am
Location: Cottesmore, Rutland

RE: OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by Chris21wen »

For a nation the size of the USA it was small, further it was ill equiped and trained. This is also true of the USN, USM and associated air forces but not to the same extent. There were a number of reasons for this the main two being the pacifists and isolationist held sway between the two wars and money (the depression). Britain had a similar problem by the way.
User avatar
crsutton
Posts: 9590
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by crsutton »

Traditionally European armies have always been large due to the close proximity of both hostile and friendly neighbors. They could not afford to not have standing armies as they could be quickly in a world of hurt. Look at the first few weeks of WWI and how quickly all of the powers mobilized massive armies.

England was the exception as until the advent of modern airplanes the theory was that the fleet would protect the Islands.

The US had little need for a large standing army as the continent was considered to be too distant from any potential hostile power. (Well, there is always the Canadian threat.[;)]) It just never made any economic sense to have a large army where it was not needed.

Having not fought a war in 400 years does not prevent the Swiss from having mandatory military service today. (I may be out of date but military service was manditory in Switzerland in the 1980s).
I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg
herwin
Posts: 6047
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 9:20 pm
Location: Sunderland, UK
Contact:

RE: OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by herwin »

ORIGINAL: Chris H

For a nation the size of the USA it was small, further it was ill equiped and trained. This is also true of the USN, USM and associated air forces but not to the same extent. There were a number of reasons for this the main two being the pacifists and isolationist held sway between the two wars and money (the depression). Britain had a similar problem by the way.

The Army belonged to Congress, while the Navy (and the Marines) belonged to the President. The condition of the Army in 1939 reflected Congressional priorities.
Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com
John Lansford
Posts: 2664
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 12:40 am

RE: OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by John Lansford »

The USN was actually quite large prior to WWII; it was the US' power projection military force and therefore the one that got most of the spending during the prewar years.  After Pearl Harbor the USN basically got a blank check as to how many and what kinds of ships it wanted, whether they were needed or not...
User avatar
mlees
Posts: 2263
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 6:14 am
Location: San Diego

RE: OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by mlees »

Thanks, all. The reason I'm asking is because, on a completely different forum-board, there is a thread where the OP postulates that the money the US currently spends on the military is better spent on domestic stuff.

In his/her mind, a large military leads to unnecessary wars. So, a small military leads to a peaceful (presumedly because your neighbors do not feel threatened) world, and no imperial ambitions.

I wished to counter with the data that, when the US was attacked in WW2, it's military was not large and threatening. (The USN and RN were in relative parity for the number one slot in size. But the US Army was relatively small.)
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by Terminus »

I believe the US Army was the same size as Yugoslavia's.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
mlees
Posts: 2263
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2003 6:14 am
Location: San Diego

RE: OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by mlees »

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I believe the US Army was the same size as Yugoslavia's.


Do you have a linkable cite handy?
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by Terminus »

No, just something I remembered reading.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
Speedysteve
Posts: 15974
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2001 8:00 am
Location: Reading, England

RE: OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by Speedysteve »

If it's just your memory we're going on i'd say it's debatable[:'(]
WitE 2 Tester
WitE Tester
BTR/BoB Tester
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by Terminus »

...ignores the feeble squawkings of Speedette...[:'(]

When the war began in 1939, the US Army was less than 200,000 strong. In 1941, it had increased something like seven times in size, thanks to rearmament.

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/USA ... tml#table1

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
niceguy2005
Posts: 12522
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 1:53 pm
Location: Super secret hidden base

RE: OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by niceguy2005 »

ORIGINAL: USS America

ORIGINAL: mlees

I thought I read somewhere that the size of the US Army in 1939 was smaller than Greece (or was it Portugal?). Can someone point me towards an online reference as to the numbers of folks in uniform (USA) pre-WW2?

Thanks!

I can't point you to a reference, but I do recall hearing that the size of the US Army was smaller than Poland's in 1939.
A lot of armies from that era had compulsory service also. It would be next to impossible to make an apples to apples comparison. Then again, America's "professional" army had training problems and I think unit quality varied greatly.
Image
Artwork graciously provided by Dixie
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by Terminus »

When America entered the war, the US Army had 37 divisions, but exactly ONE was considered fit for operational deployment overseas.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
niceguy2005
Posts: 12522
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 1:53 pm
Location: Super secret hidden base

RE: OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by niceguy2005 »

ORIGINAL: Chris H

For a nation the size of the USA it was small, further it was ill equiped and trained. This is also true of the USN, USM and associated air forces but not to the same extent. There were a number of reasons for this the main two being the pacifists and isolationist held sway between the two wars and money (the depression). Britain had a similar problem by the way.
Not all units were poorly equipped or trained. Unit preparedness was quite variable. However, it is true that generally equipment and the procurement system in general were outdated and poor through the late 20s and early 30s. By 1939 FDR's administration had turned the corner on this and made great improvements...but it had to take time to ripple throughout the war department.
Image
Artwork graciously provided by Dixie
herwin
Posts: 6047
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 9:20 pm
Location: Sunderland, UK
Contact:

RE: OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by herwin »

ORIGINAL: mlees

Thanks, all. The reason I'm asking is because, on a completely different forum-board, there is a thread where the OP postulates that the money the US currently spends on the military is better spent on domestic stuff.

In his/her mind, a large military leads to unnecessary wars. So, a small military leads to a peaceful (presumedly because your neighbors do not feel threatened) world, and no imperial ambitions.

I wished to counter with the data that, when the US was attacked in WW2, it's military was not large and threatening. (The USN and RN were in relative parity for the number one slot in size. But the US Army was relatively small.)

As far as Japan was concerned, America was very threatening, mostly because we had the ability to project our power.
Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: OT: question: US military size, prewar

Post by Terminus »

Strictly speaking, it was the Japanese Navy that felt America was threatening. The Japanese Army was more concerned with the Soviets.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”