Article

2009-12-10 Home Front: Politix

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Hupereth Glack5732 2009-12-10 10:31|| || Front Page|| [14 views ] Top

#1 History lesson on why 78 should not be repeated
By: James Carafano
Examiner Columnist
October 26, 2009

Extracts

He followed an unpopular president. He received a strong election mandate. He changed the tone in Washington, D.C.
He said human rights mattered, that Americas image in the world had to be remade.

He would receive a Nobel Peace Prize.

As the end of his presidencys first year drew near, the future looked bright. He had brought change change that mattered.

It was 1977. The next year was very bad....

...At the same time the White House was amping up the soft power, it was also looking to cut back on military commitments.

Faced with a troubled economy, the Carter administration was also looking to cut back on military spending. Thus, the president embraced Defense Secretary Harold Browns offset strategy. The Armed Forces would buy nothing new. The Pentagon would skip a generation and rethink military needs....

The rest here

Preview problem?

Posted by Willy 2009-12-10 11:51|| 2009-12-10 11:51|| Front Page Top

#2 I thought so. We're dropping the Taiwan guarantee. No way they can maintain a credible threat to the Straits if we're cutting the carrier groups that much. What is that, twenty percent?

Posted by Mitch H.">Mitch H. 2009-12-10 12:20|| http://blogfonte.blogspot.com/]">[http://blogfonte.blogspot.com/] 2009-12-10 12:20|| Front Page Top

#3 Even if they only cut carriers and carrier groups from 11 to 10, we're still at only 9 carriers, because several of our carriers need to refuel. With nuclear powered ships, refueling is a year long operation and is combined with a yard stay to update the ship. The plan is to rotate them in one at a time, and so for the next few years one carrier is always unavailable.

So 10 = 9 in this math, and 9 = 8.

Posted by Steve White 2009-12-10 13:36|| 2009-12-10 13:36|| Front Page Top

#4 So we won't buy more F-22s because they're too expensive and buy F-35s instead.

Now F-35s are too expensive. What do we do to ensure air supremacy in the future?

Posted by Steve White 2009-12-10 13:37|| 2009-12-10 13:37|| Front Page Top

#5 P-35's then?

Posted by Besoeker 2009-12-10 13:41|| 2009-12-10 13:41|| Front Page Top

#6 UCAVs. We're accelerating delivery by outsourcing the programming to TatvaSoft.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2009-12-10 13:41|| 2009-12-10 13:41|| Front Page Top

#7 Well, fewer carriers is good because they are just hugely expensive targets in this age of modern supersonic antiship missiles. But reducing the USN isn't the answer because it's them who keep the seas open for American trade.

Posted by gromky 2009-12-10 14:05|| 2009-12-10 14:05|| Front Page Top

#8 "But reducing the USN isn't the answer because it's them who keep the seas open for American trade."

Actually, it is the answer, gromky.

For the clowns in the White House (and the DemoncRat ~~Con~~ Regress).

For just the reason you stated.

Posted by Barbara Skolaut">Barbara Skolaut 2009-12-10 14:13|| 2009-12-10 14:13|| Front Page Top

#9 We can keep the seas open more effectively for less money by using weapons systems far less costly than a CSG. Like a lot more submarines.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2009-12-10 14:27|| 2009-12-10 14:27|| Front Page Top

#10 Only if you never expect to project power ashore NS. Subs run out of missiles fairly quickly when using conventional warheads rather than nucs.

Posted by tipover 2009-12-10 18:24|| 2009-12-10 18:24|| Front Page Top

#11 That's why we'll be investing a lot in long range UAVs with the money we get by not building any new ~~targets~~ CSGs.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2009-12-10 20:38|| 2009-12-10 20:38|| Front Page Top

#12 Not really useful for close-in air support.

Posted by Pappy 2009-12-10 22:29|| 2009-12-10 22:29|| Front Page Top

23:55 Blackbeard Glerert1783
23:28 badanov
23:23 Old Patriot
23:09 Barbara Skolaut
23:07 newc
22:55 trailing wife
22:53 Old Patriot
22:52 gromky
22:47 Old Patriot
22:33 Frank G
22:29 Pappy
22:29 Scooter McGruder
22:25 trailing wife
22:23 Old Patriot
10:22 Fred
10:20 Fred
22:20 lex
22:19 GirlThursday
10:19 Fred
10:17 Fred
22:16 Frank G
22:15 USN, Ret.
22:12 USN, Ret.
22:05 Redneck Jim