War Hawks Of The '80's Have Returned To The Pentagon And Congress

[shockedcanadian]

China spends less yes, but consider how much cheaper local military technology is especially when they don't spend as much money in R&D since they steal those technologies and build copy cats. Many Russian and American technologies are copied by China at much cheaper costs and definitely less costs in the beginning of the process. Due to hacking, espionage, theft they have all they need, especially when there are no consequences for China, why would they stop?

You overlook an important point to the Cuban Missile Crisis, the weapons America had in Turkey. MAD wasn't even coined at this point, I am referring specifically to the 1980's where America and Russia had enough nukes to destroy everything multiple times. There should have been logic then about limits of nukes as had certainly reached the stage of diminishing returns, but, I might have argued that the Star Wars project was worth pursuing. The ultimate deterrent that had Russia quite worried.

America doesn't have to declare itself anything, it just has to be. Whether you like it or not, acknowledge it or not, without America's leadership we will be looking at a very different global environment, one that I don't want to experience. For the record, I'm not someone who supports war, I'm one who supports strength to avoid war. The real empires of 2016 are built with economic strength, something other nations are taking advantage of when dealing with America,

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

China spends less yes, but consider how much cheaper local military technology is especially when they don't spend as much money in R&D since they steal those technologies and build copy cats. Many Russian and American technologies are copied by China at much cheaper costs and definitely less costs in the beginning of the process. Due to hacking, espionage, theft they have all they need, especially when there are no consequences for China, why would they stop?

A rationalization...nothing more and nothing less. A hollow argument! Using your own example of China, because they are NOT strategically oriented globally, they are incapable of projecting their power militarily except perhaps by missile.

You overlook an important point to the Cuban Missile Crisis, the weapons America had in Turkey.

I didn't overlook anything given the point I made. You are trying to change the narrative to cover your ignorance of that era through which I LIVED and remember very well!

MAD wasn't even coined at this point, I am referring specifically to the 1980's where America and Russia had enough nukes to destroy everything multiple times.

Really? The man responsible for the strategic concept of Mutually Assured Destruction and came up with the acronym MAD was John von Neumann who died in 1957. It looks like you are a few decades late in your 'estimation'!

There should have been logic then about limits of nukes as had certainly reached the stage of diminishing returns, but, I might have argued that the Star Wars project was worth pursuing. The ultimate deterrent that had Russia quite worried.

Off topic blather! I will not follow you into the weeds of the wilderness! If you wish, talk to yourself.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Gather around folks and watch the Hawks of War do their little dance once again.

Forsaking the budget constraints forced upon them by the Congress through normal operation and the devil of sequestration, the Navy PTB in the Pentagon have announced they will embark on a Naval expansion of fleet assets equaling that of the 1980's. The increase takes the already projected expansion of 308 ships to an unbelievable 355 ships exceeding even Fuhrer-elect Trump's notice of increasing the fleet to 350 ships! ~~ US Navy’s New Fleet Goal: 355 Ships ~~

Based on the 2014 inventory of commissioned ships in active service of 282 that would be an increase of almost 26% in total number of ships in the US Navy! Regan pulled this same budget busting crap in the '80's by pumping up the military "to make America a leader again" and nearly tripled the debt.

Our last carrier (CVN-78, USS Gerald R Ford) has cost over $13 billion so far, but is yet to join the fleet even though the contract was awarded in 2008. Expect more cost overruns to be added to the $3.2 billion already billed. CVN-79 is scheduled to launch in 2020 at 18% complete last March and CVN-80 scheduled to be laid down in 2018, the third hull in the Ford Class. ~~ U.S. Navy's new $13B aircraft carrier can't fight - CNNPolitics.com ~~

Even with these additions already ordered and scheduled, the Pentagon wants to add yet another carrier to the Fleet with this new very costly expansion! And the INITIAL cost and the inevitable cost overruns doesn't stop with the 26% more ships added to the fleet, they must be manned but even before that the new manning must be trained, and paid and retrained and re-manned and retrained, ad nauseum.

A new F-35B is around $110 million and a carrier's fighter wing compliment of 45 aircraft added to a cost of a new carrier would be around $5 billion alone to say nothing of fuel, maintenance and armament costs and replacement of lost aircraft! The new ships must be fully supplied AND kept supplied for the duration of their entire service to say nothing of the constant maintenance and upkeep! That comes to trillions over the years simply to display a peacock's feathers when we won't be involve in further neocolonial adventurism!

Further, the Army and Air Force aren't going to let the Navy get all the cream are they? How many more war toys will those two branches of the military be clamoring for to spite Navy?

Be careful what you wish for because Trump's 'VISION' of making America great again could well be its downfall with the hands of this new breed of Centurion clamoring for the New American Century under the false flag of patriotism!

on the 2014 inventory of commissioned ships in active service of 282 that would be an increase of almost 26% in total number of ships in the US Navy! Regan pulled this same budget busting crap in the '80's by pumping up the military "to make America a leader again" and nearly tripled the debt.


Gotta love propaganda and ignorance of history of the left

We roughly had a 350 ship navy in 1980, Reagen went to 590..


280 is to fucking low that Obama cut it by.. 350... Is about right.



.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

We roughly had a 350 ship navy in 1980, Reagen went to 590..

At the end of FY 1980, 9/30/80, the US Navy had 530 vessels on the active ship roster. Your figure of ONLY 350 active service USN ships at the beginning of Reagan's first term is grossly inaccurate! At the end of FY 1981 after Reagan had come into office, nine (9) ships had been decommissioned bringing the number down to 521 commissioned in active service.

Between the end of FY 1988 and the end of FY 1989, between which Reagan left office, the number of active service USN ships rose from 573 to 592 in that one year period. Your claim that Reagan was responsible for increasing the number of active service USN ships from 350 to 590, an increase of 240 hulls to the active ship inventory is flatly and clearly false by Trump proportions!

The actual number of hulls added in that eight year period would be no more than 592 maximum at the end minus the 521 minimum at the beginning yielding a MAXIMUM increase of 71 ships during Reagan's two terms; but more likely somewhere in the low to mid 60's but who wants to quibble over a few 10's of billions, eh? That MAXIMUM 71 ships is less that a third of the 240 hulls you claimed Reagan added to the commissioned rolls! It's also less that the 75 new ships the Navy boys are clamoring for from Trump, more than Reagan OK'ed and one Hell of a lot more costly!

280 is to fucking low that Obama cut it by.. 350... Is about right.

Really? At the end of FY 2000, 9/30/00, less than three months before Bush 43 took office, the active service USN ship count was 318. Over the next eight years, near the end of Bush, Cheney & Co's cabal on 9/30/08, that inventory of active service ships had been reduced by 36 to 282.

As of the end of the last FY, 9/30/16, the number of active service USN ships totaled 275. that difference between the 282 hulls on the active rolls and the current number of 275 is only SEVEN (7). Your claim that Obama cut the active service USN ships by 350 is also grossly inaccurate. The propaganda is of your making across the board, slick! Try truth for a change rather that pulling shit out of you nether region!

Anyone interested in the facts can look up all those numbers here: US Ship Force Levels

 

[Wyatt earp]

We roughly had a 350 ship navy in 1980, Reagen went to 590..

At the end of FY 1980, 9/30/80, the US Navy had 530 vessels on the active ship roster. Your figure of ONLY 350 active service USN ships at the beginning of Reagan's first term is grossly inaccurate! At the end of FY 1981 after Reagan had come into office, nine (9) ships had been decommissioned bringing the number down to 521 commissioned in active service.

Between the end of FY 1988 and the end of FY 1989, between which Reagan left office, the number of active service USN ships rose from 573 to 592 in that one year period. Your claim that Reagan was responsible for increasing the number of active service USN ships from 350 to 590, an increase of 240 hulls to the active ship inventory is flatly and clearly false by Trump proportions!

The actual number of hulls added in that eight year period would be no more than the minimum of 592 maximum at the end minus the 521 minimum at the beginning yielding a MAXIMUM increase of 71 ships during Reagan's two terms; but more likely somewhere in the low to mid 60's but who wants to quibble over a few 10's of billions, eh? That MAXIMUM 71 ships is less that a third of the 240 hulls you claimed Reagan added to the commissioned rolls! It's also less that the 75 new ships the Navy boys are clamoring for from Trump, more than Reagan OK'ed and one Hell of a lot more costly!

280 is to fucking low that Obama cut it by.. 350... Is about right.

Really? At the end of FY 2000, 9/30/00, less than three months before Bush 43 took office, the active service USN ship count was 318. Over the next eight years, near the end of Bush, Cheney & Co's cabal on 9/30/08, that inventory of active service ships had been reduced by 36 to 282.

As of the end of the last FY, 9/30/16, the number of active service USN ships totaled 275. that difference between the 282 hulls on the active rolls and the current number of 275 is only SEVEN (7). Your claim that Obama cut the active service USN ships by 350 is also grossly inaccurate. The propaganda is of your making across the board, slick! Try truth for a change rather that pulling shit out of you nether region!

Anyone interested in the facts can look up all those numbers here: US Ship Force Levels

Thanks I was looking for that link a few months ago...


I could only find bullshit links that I had to decifier through..


Numbers don't really matter..


We had over 650 at the end of Nam'

And then dropped it to what 530 in 1979?


So Ronnie Raised it to around his goal of 600..


Then After Ronnie destroyed the U. S.S.R....Bill, Bush Jr and Obama dropped it to its current what 270?



So how the fuck is your OP. True by saying the War Hawks is back by wanting 350 hulls?

That's just around 60% of what it was in 1988?


So who started lying first here me or you?


.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

So how the fuck is your OP. True by saying the War Hawks is back by wanting 350 hulls?

That's just around 60% of what it was in 1988?

It's true based on need and capabilities. You know jack shit about the US Navy and its capabilities and vulnerabilities! You're a bloody fraud and I've already proved you're a liar twice over in my last post!

So who started lying first here me or you?

You did asshole! It's what you do, and it obviously doesn't bother you a bit!

 

[jknowgood]

You voted for clinton and you're seething right now with rage.

Gawd Damn you're an ignorant, petty, small minded gadfly! Just keep making yourself look the foolish ass with your fantasies and displaying it to all and sundry!

You obviously don't have the credentials to call someone else ignorant. Holy cow, lol.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

You obviously don't have the credentials to call someone else ignorant. Holy cow, lol.

What a brave little coward you are with that hit-and-run post! You must make mommy and daddy very proud of their residual sheet stain!