Gates To Navy: Anchors Away

Investors.com ^ | May 7, 2010 | Investors Business Daily staff

[Polybius]

That’s all well and good, if you have a bottomless treasury. But as things stand now, the US will have to cancel Social Security, Obamacare, Medicare and Medicaid, and slash Defense by a good 50%.

Yep.

When you have to choose between Welfare Benefits and National Survival, you should choose Welfare Benefits every time.

Russia ruined its navy after the collapse of the Soviet Union by trying to keep too many ships afloat. It ended up with rusting fleets incapable of service.

Russia has the luxury of not NEEDING a Navy for its national survival. In spite of the collapse of the Russian Navy, the U.S. has no intention of posing any threat to Russian maritime traffic and Russia is so self-sufficient in oil that it actually EXPORTS the stuff.

The U.S. on the other hand, is dependent on open sea lanes for national survival.

Without open sea lanes, the imported U.S oil supply comes to a halt and so does America.

The first Pacific War over the issue of foreign oil supplies was fought between Japan and the U.S. between 1941 and 1945. (Japan was desperate for imported oil)

The second Pacific War over foreign oil supplies will be between China and the U.S. sometime in the unpredictable future. (Both the U.S. and China will be desperate for imported oil)

China’s 2009 Crude Oil Imports Advance to Record ..... China, the world’s second-largest energy consumer, increased crude oil purchases to a record last year to meet rising demand ... Crude oil imports reached 203.8 million metric tons last year, or 4.1 million barrels a day

The deciding factor of what you build or do not build has to be what the Chinese are building for that future conflict.

China military build-up seems U.S.-focused: Mullen

Otherwise, when the balloon goes up, China will win, the U.S. will lose, and the U.S. will then become a nuclear-armed economic pigmy, too dangerous to invade, which, however, China can starve at its leisure as the Chines Navy will control the world's sea lanes.

And, no, Social Security, Obamacare, Medicare and Medicaid will no longer exist.

[stevie_d_64]

He has Queeg-itis...

Better hide the strawberries...

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

I agree that China remains the biggest threat. And the USN has treated it as such since the 1990s. However, in his wisdom, W. Bush opened the door to India, and did much to convince them that China is as much or more a threat to them than it is to us.

In turn, India is now going whole hog in building up its naval and armed forces. But this divides Chinese attention, at a time when their economic miracle is rapidly grinding to a halt.

One sub concept that I’ve seen proposed to counter the Chinese threat are prepositioned, small, modular, littoral ships, that can be relatively quickly assembled if the mainland decides to do an openly D-Day style landing in Taiwan. An armada to defeat an armada.

In such a dense missile, aircraft and ship environment, an aircraft carrier fleet would be rather vulnerable and inadequate. But in reserve, outside of the primary conflict zone, it could lend huge amounts of support with far less risk.

[rahbert]

targets for cruise missile tests, reefs, torpedo excersizes..

[chessplayer]

“As we learned last year, you don’t necessarily need a billion-dollar guided missile destroyer to chase down and deal with a bunch of teenage pirates wielding AK-47s and RPGs (rocket-propelled grenades),” Gates quipped.

Stupid bastard. We did`nt build them just to chase down teenage pirates. Where do these people come from?

[ASOC]

Well, something have to give, and with the taods we have in power now, it’s going to be the military.

Don’t like it, but until 2010, not much I can do.

[USNBandit]

Those cruisers we don't need are the backbone of the strategic missile defense with the land based missile program being scaled back.

The Administration says we don't need cruisers, and in the next breath will say since we have those same cruisers we don't need ground based missile defense. We don't need carriers, but we've jacked up the carrier deployment schedule because we seem to need those assets in theater.

[CyberAnt]

Without our Navy, we’re going to be a sitting duck!

How do these people sleep at night ..??

[RipSawyer]

“I think they mean, Anchors Aweigh.”
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Nope, they mean Anchors Away, an intentional pun.

[Leisler]

I don’t think the Kuwaitis felt that way. Maybe it was the triple canopy that surprised us.

[Leisler]

General Kagen, four star, retired and consultant to Petratus, said if it wasn’t for a handful of Army officers, many detailed to the backwaters, Iraq would of been lost. In short, it wasn’t so much a mis, short thought or error, as much as the Army didn’t as an institution at all want to think about such a scenario. MacArthur would, and did, and the Army from the end of the Civil war to the end of the Korean war had a good and successful tradition of thought, action and success in other than full on total warfare.

Every thing I have read said there were no, zero, zip post capture plans.

The Cole, Stark shorcomings were well, publicly exposed for decades. Any SEAL, out of the box Marine or attack armed officer knew when to attack. Both ships well represented the command structure.

The Chinese will have to contend with not just us, but Japan, Korea, Australia and India plus us.

Good luck to them. I’d like to sit in that strategic discussion. ( not that China wouldn’t get a doomed from the get go Hitler, in which case reality wouldn’t prevent you from having a war against a delusionist._)

[Leisler]

The sad thing is Blackwater could better, at one one hundredth the cost, handle the pirates then the Navy.

Now, the Navy has the money. I know that they have the officers, and men. It is just as a bureaucracy they can not wrap their head around it.

Take five tramp oil burner, throw ten go fasts and a couple of light choppers on each and then fend off the blizzard of requested officer and enlisted paper work for the great Somalia hunt.

But, no.

[LjubivojeRadosavljevic]

Gates is a whore...

You are insubordinate and your conduct is unbecoming of what is expected around here.

[Typical_Whitey]

Somebody get this idiot an impairment test he seems to be totally Drunk on Obama Juice...

[dsc]

“Was the Stark...prepared?”

As I understand it, that was human error.

[dsc]

“Do we have the yards to repair them and the crews to man them?”

Do chickens have lips?

[Leisler]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Stark_%28FFG-31%29

[dsc]

“Because most peace activists believed that the sheer size of the armed forces in the years leading up to World War I had been an important cause of the war’s outbreak...”

I guess I just have to accept that “peace activist” is synonymous with “low-grade moron.”

[dsc]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Stark_%28FFG-31%29

I am somewhat familiar with the circumstances, having been there earlier on a ship doing the same job as the Stark.

The story we got is that the TAO failed to act immediately after being informed by the CIC petty officer of the watch that an Iraqi military plane was peregrinating in an apparent search for a target. While the Wiki article is a bit vague, it does not contradict that.

Note that the Vulcan Phalanx CIWS was in standby. That indicates that the TAO failed to respond to the threat posed by the diaperhead and his missiles.

I blame the TAO. He should have gone to GQ and begun dealing with the Iraqi long before he got within his missile release range.

[cva66snipe]

Gates is part of the problem and a hindering to a solution along with all past Congress and all past and current POTUS after Reagan when it comes to defense matters. Russia despite her problems has left her factories and tooling more or less intact. We bulldozed our facilities and scrapped the tooling. Then we sold the land to developers. The Navy hasn't faired much better. Bad decision making starting from Sec of Def Cheney in canceling the F-14 program and destroying tooling on through the present.

China is not a nation that's incapable of major ship building by any means. Actually the situations in Russia and China could change drastically in months. Both Russia and China have the facilities to build ships and subs in mass quantities or the ability to quickly build such.. The main missing element isn't technology but rather money. Where would money come from? Look to the Middle East. Who would be willing to fund Russia and China's military build up for self protection and their end goal of the elimination of Israel? Look to the Middle East.

The United States of America has gone from four to one shipbuilders that are capable of turning out even a conventional aircraft carrier.

Now everyone remembers Pearl Harbor but no one considers this fact. The entire east coast carrier fleet minus one carrier is home-ported all out of the same home port. In that port can be up to possibly eight carriers in a 10 mile or less radius. I have a picture of FIVE at the same base at the same time in a half mile roll. Up the river from there just a very few short miles is the carrier repair shipyard for the east coast fleet. Only that shipyard and the one a few miles downstream can repair carriers. Of those two yards one is also the only builder left.

Oh but I'm not through yet. A few miles from there is the Naval Amphib Base for most amphibious assault and carriers at one base. Also in the area is two Naval Air Stations. In other words a potentially worse than Pearl Harbor because if those facilities were destroyed in a single attack we would not be able to recover in time.

The defense of the United States Of America is the primary function of our federal government. There can be no higher priority than this. Anyone with any basic knowledge of how ships must operate knows that in all reality you at no given time will have more than two thirds available for deployment due to necessary maintenance which is mission critical. That would be under the best of circumstances. Ships can not miss this downtime more than once without serious issues developing. Anyone thinking otherwise needs to study the time frame between 1990-1996. The Kitty Hawk and JFK fiasco's weren't the first ones to happen. We lost a carrier in that time frame. Three six month deployments in three years. Then BOOM! The Navy was already in a deep readiness spiral by 1993 thanks to the policies that began under Poppy Bush/Sec of Def Cheney and it has only continued to get worse ever sense that time.

One lucky air strike at the right time in the right place would make Pearl Harbor look mild in comparison to the damage we now are open too. Downsizing more is not the answer. Aircraft carrier whether Gates likes them are not is still the fastest way to get 70 plus aircraft on that carrier and their support moved almost anywhere in the world and operational in less than a week.

As for pirates? Like one Freeper said. The U.S. Government lacks the will to authorize our Navy to act. The sooner our elected stop trying to make diplomats out of Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, and Airmen, the sooner things will change. Diplomatic stupidity put the COLE in the wrong port and the wrong time two days out from fleet and alone in a known terrorist nation. The Navy I served under The COLE could have been fuel at sea even by a carrier if necessary.