America's Incredible Shrinking Navy

fbz_1511fb309cefd2b908f74c23e67a9a60.jpg
 

Libs have trouble separating reality from television and the like. Most of their news sources involve clever graphics and photoshopped pictures.

But let me ask you, asshole, aren't you the least bit concerned that this administration has degraded our ability to defend ourselves, and lied to us about it?
 
How big a Navy do we need?

We have 10 Supercarrier task forces....no other nation has one
We have over 30 nuclear ballistic submarines.....never will be used
We patrol all the oceans of the world

Where is our threat?
 
How big a Navy do we need?

We have 10 Supercarrier task forces....no other nation has one
We have over 30 nuclear ballistic submarines.....never will be used
We patrol all the oceans of the world

Where is our threat?

Didn't read the article, eh nutsucker? I can't respond to this level of ignorance.
 
How big a Navy do we need?

We have 10 Supercarrier task forces....no other nation has one
We have over 30 nuclear ballistic submarines.....never will be used
We patrol all the oceans of the world

Where is our threat?

Didn't read the article, eh nutsucker? I can't respond to this level of ignorance.

You have failed to establish that our Navy is incable of performing its mission or meeting it's threat

Go at it
 
How big a Navy do we need?

We have 10 Supercarrier task forces....no other nation has one
We have over 30 nuclear ballistic submarines.....never will be used
We patrol all the oceans of the world

Where is our threat?

Didn't read the article, eh nutsucker? I can't respond to this level of ignorance.

You have failed to establish that our Navy is incable of performing its mission or meeting it's threat

Go at it
Who said that? Did you read the article?
 
Last edited:
Russia can not afford a submarine, much less a navy. China has been building theirs up, and is about at our level in 1932.
 
Russia can not afford a submarine, much less a navy. China has been building theirs up, and is about at our level in 1932.

Don't tell Rabbi

He has his panties all in a wad about how vulnerable our Navy is
 
Russia can not afford a submarine, much less a navy. China has been building theirs up, and is about at our level in 1932.

Don't tell Rabbi

He has his panties all in a wad about how vulnerable our Navy is

I'll have to take your word for it. I've had Rabbi on ignore for a couple of years!:eusa_whistle:
 
From today's WSJ. The administration claims our Navy is a certain size. But they get there by counting clapped out ships and others that hardly qualify as warships. Somehow they think they're fooling people. Trouble is, they're fooling the wrong people. Russia is paying attention. China is paying attention. It is the American news media that is not paying attention. The least open and honest administration in history.
Steve Cohen: America's Incredible Shrinking Navy - WSJ.com

Americans may be war-weary after Iraq and Afghanistan. But the world is still a hostile place, and the U.S.Navy is stretched too thin. And in a new sleight of hand, the Obama administration has changed what it considers a warship when reporting the size of the Navy's "battle force." From now on it will include the two hospital ships, Mercy and Comfort, 10 small coastal patrol vessels and a high-speed transport. Add those, subtract a few minesweepers, and voilà—the Navy fleet has grown to 293 from 283 ships.

Most of the new additions are lightly armed coastal-patrol craft and not true oceangoing ships. Originally designed to carry Navy SEALs and other special-operations forces, these 179-foot ships turned out to be inadequate for that role. Instead, armed with machine guns, they can be used to support "low intensity conflicts." They were launched in the early 1990s and recalled in 2010 to deal with fatigue damage to their hulls. Their military role is questionable and they're well past their expiration date, yet they sail on for public-relations purposes.

The Navy takes great pride in its humanitarian relief work, and its recruiting commercials feature photos of tsunami and earthquake survivors receiving food, water and medical care delivered by aircraft carriers, amphibious command ships, and of course, the two hospital ships. Such soft power diplomacy is an essential part of our foreign-policy strategy.

But substituting hospital ships, a former car ferry (which the Navy itself refers to as a noncombatant) and over-the-hill coastal craft for capital ships is delusional when calculating the battle force. So is the boast that the U.S. Navy has an 11 aircraft-carrier fleet.

Much mroe at the source.

List of aircraft carriers by country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So you think that China may build another aircraft carrier and double their fleet? From looking at the list, it looks like the US has more aircraft carriers than the rest of the other countries combined. ******* Italy has more aircraft carriers than China.


Number of aircraft carriers by operating nation


United States United States 68 10 2 56 3 12
United Kingdom United Kingdom 41 2 0 40 2 12
Japan Japan 20 0 0 20 0 4
France France 8 1 0 7 0 7
Russia Russia 7 1 0 6 0 2
Australia Australia 3 0 0 3 0 0
Canada Canada 3 0 0 3 0 0
Spain Spain 3 1 1 1 0 1
India India 5 2 0 1 2 0
Italy Italy 2 2 0 0 0 2
Brazil Brazil 2 1 0 1 0 0
China China 1 1 0 0 1 0
Thailand Thailand 1 1 0 0 0 0
Argentina Argentina 2 0 0 2 0 0
Netherlands Netherlands 1 0 0 1 0 0
Germany Germany 0 0 0 0 0 8
 
Last edited:
A single super nuclear fueled carrier today would dwarf the entire fleet prior to WW2. A single boomer nuclear powered sub has more potential destructive force than the entire WW2 Navy. We have so many ships out there that they don't even have a function anymore like that mine sweeper that went aground in the Philippines. Under liberal agendas a US warship has become a floating soap opera with pregnancies disrupting the effectiveness and as we have seen a freaking plywood Crisscraft with a couple of hopped up suicidal teenagers can disable a warship. A shrinking Navy ain't the problem. The fat asses in the Pentagon who can't figure out how to defeat an enemy that functions in the 6th century and a president who undermines the Military mission is the problem.
 
15th post
A single super nuclear fueled carrier today would dwarf the entire fleet prior to WW2. A single boomer nuclear powered sub has more potential destructive force than the entire WW2 Navy. We have so many ships out there that they don't even have a function anymore like that mine sweeper that went aground in the Philippines. Under liberal agendas a US warship has become a floating soap opera with pregnancies disrupting the effectiveness and as we have seen a freaking plywood Crisscraft with a couple of hopped up suicidal teenagers can disable a warship. A shrinking Navy ain't the problem. The fat asses in the Pentagon who can't figure out how to defeat an enemy that functions in the 6th century and a president who undermines the Military mission is the problem.

A little heavy on rhetoric. All you really said is that you don't like the president. That is boring shit.
 
You know what this military needs? More horses and bayonets! :salute: :cow: - Dang sequester!
 
Back
Top Bottom