Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Do We Really Need More Submarines and Aircraft Carriers?
Slate ^ | Feb. 14, 2011 | By Fred Kaplan

Posted on 02/15/2011 1:33:47 PM PST by americanophile

Will this be the year that Congress takes after the defense budget, seeing it not as holy writ laid down by an unchallengeable priesthood but rather as a political document hammered out by competing bureaucracies, each with long-standing vested interests? It's a bubbling brew out there, the Tea Party Republicans keen to slash any and all federal programs, joined in a potential alliance of convenience with liberal Democrats seeking to kill big-ticket weapons slammed as pork-barrel waste or Cold War antiques.

The Obama administration's proposed defense budget for fiscal year 2012, rolled out Monday afternoon by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, makes for a gigantic target on this shooting range.

All told, it amounts to $702.8 billion, broken down as follows: $553 billion for the baseline discretionary Defense Department budget, $5 billion for a handful of mandatory programs, $117.8 billion for the costs of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and—a category usually omitted in these sorts of analyses but clearly laid out in the tables of the White House budget office—$27 billion for "defense-related" programs in other federal departments, nearly half of it for nuclear-weapons labs, reactors, and warhead maintenance in the Department of Energy.

The money to fight the wars is probably untouchable. First, as a result of the troop pullout from Iraq, it's a lot less money than the $160 billion funded last year. Second, as was the case last year, Gates is straightforward in itemizing these war-fighting costs ($80 billion for the troops and supplies, $10 billion for equipment to counter roadside bombs, $12 billion to repair and replace equipment, etc.). This is a refreshing contrast to his predecessor, Donald Rumsfeld, who offered no elaboration and stuffed several non-war-related programs into the account to make the baseline budget seem smaller.

(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...


TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: budget; defensespending; military
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-84 next last
Comments?
1 posted on 02/15/2011 1:33:55 PM PST by americanophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: americanophile

yes we need them


2 posted on 02/15/2011 1:35:25 PM PST by sitkaspruce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

Of course not...we need more peace signs, flowers and fluffy rabbits to throw at our enemies.


3 posted on 02/15/2011 1:35:35 PM PST by max americana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

Hmm, lemme think on this a minute....

YES!

... if they will be used against US citizens’ enemies and not on US citizens...


4 posted on 02/15/2011 1:36:36 PM PST by bgill (Kenyan Parliament - how could a man born in Kenya who is not even a native American become the POTUS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile
In a word - Yes!!!

Lamh Foistenach Abu!
5 posted on 02/15/2011 1:38:19 PM PST by ConorMacNessa (HM/2 USN, 3/5 Marines, RVN '69 - St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

Mine are all here:

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/06/Confronting-the-Unsustainable-Growth-of-Welfare-Entitlements-Principles-of-Reform-and-the-Next-Steps

Move down the page a bit to the graphs. I can find a nearly a trillion that can be saved RIGHT NOW!


6 posted on 02/15/2011 1:39:15 PM PST by I cannot think of a name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: max americana

And HUGS, more hugs ...


7 posted on 02/15/2011 1:39:21 PM PST by exnavy (May the Lord grant our troops protection and endurance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

You can never have too much of anything.


8 posted on 02/15/2011 1:39:42 PM PST by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously..... You won't live through it anyway.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

DemoGenerates just can’t wait to be slaves again...Put in Concentration Camps, and eventually plowed into mass graves again...How else can they prove themselves to be “good”?

They all suffer with Death Camp Victim Envy.


9 posted on 02/15/2011 1:40:03 PM PST by DGHoodini (Iran Azadi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

If it ever hits the fan with China or Russia, we’ll wish we had more of both, but especially submarines.


10 posted on 02/15/2011 1:40:59 PM PST by NavVet ("You Lie!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

>> Comments?

We need to build plenty of submarines and aircraft carriers.

We also need a moratorium on bleeding-heart Slate liberals.


11 posted on 02/15/2011 1:42:19 PM PST by Nervous Tick (Trust in God, but row away from the rocks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NavVet

Agreed sir.

STS2/SS (SSN 724)


12 posted on 02/15/2011 1:42:59 PM PST by TexasPatriot1 (I am unique, Just like everybody else.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: americanophile
Too much money on last generation weapons for last generation wars. The future is in UAVs, directed energy weapons, and spaced based defenses. The last two the very programs that have been cut/eliminated. The future is for the bold and the victors will have the high ground.
13 posted on 02/15/2011 1:43:20 PM PST by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

Most certainly.

And we need less welfare for folks who are here illegally, no NPR, no relief for idiot liberal states who are bankrupt, and total rejection of any govt backed retirement for the UAW and other toads.

And that’s the truth.


14 posted on 02/15/2011 1:44:16 PM PST by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile
Liberals think yet more funding for welfare payouts & public employee salaries & pensions is money better spent than that spent on nasty ol' national defense.

After all, the former guarantees a 100% ROI.

15 posted on 02/15/2011 1:46:18 PM PST by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile
Lawmakers should ask the Navy to lay out (in closed-door hearings, if need be) the precise scenarios in which the United States needs more submarines and aircraft carriers than it already has. They'll find the scenarios are pretty far-fetched.

I think Joe Biden would answer the question with two words, "China."

16 posted on 02/15/2011 1:46:32 PM PST by Jacquerie (The Journolist Media – Sword and Shield of the democrat party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

Yes, and we need to tax liberals at twice the rate of patriots to pay for them.


17 posted on 02/15/2011 1:46:58 PM PST by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

War is coming. We’re going to need more of everything.

Thats the one thing federal government is supposed to do. Cut everywhere else.


18 posted on 02/15/2011 1:47:16 PM PST by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton
Too much money on last generation weapons for last generation wars.

Will this still be true if we get a conservative POTUS and the middle east comes unglued? Won't most of the fighting be more traditional, meaning one country invading another with tanks and troops and aircraft, etc?

19 posted on 02/15/2011 1:47:55 PM PST by paulycy (Islamo-Marxism is Evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

I’ll let this man speak for me:

“This is the man who wants to be the Commander in Chief of our U.S. Armed Forces?! U.S. forces armed with what — spitballs?!”

- Zell Miller, referring to John Kerry, at the 2004 Republican National Convention


20 posted on 02/15/2011 1:48:02 PM PST by Palmetto Patriot (Just exactly when is the next Election?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton
Yes, that's the alternative - not no defense spending, but perhaps smarter defense spending. Starting with eliminating the appropriations for weapons that even the commanders don't want.
21 posted on 02/15/2011 1:48:23 PM PST by americanophile ("The Constitution is the guide which I will never abandon." - George Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: americanophile
Do We Really Need More Submarines and Aircraft Carriers?

Considering the problems we're having maintaing in the numbers we have currently then perhaps 'more submarines and aircraft carriers' is a big misleading.

22 posted on 02/15/2011 1:48:25 PM PST by K-Stater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton
I agree with you somewhat.

The F-35, if it survives, will be our last manned tactical fighter. UAV's/ UCAV's are the future.

Directed Energy Weapons are about to become a breakout technology in my view.

So I would cancel the F-35. I also would cancel the EFV and make the Marines/ Navy come up with a 21st century answer to the Higgins boat (25 kt. speed, etc.). The Army's FCS Program was always way too ambitious. And does the LCS really pay for itself? I have heard that the Navy Surface Warfare community hates it.

We absolutely need new CVN's and SSN's-- to replace the old ones and the ones that the Chinese are going to sink.

23 posted on 02/15/2011 1:49:23 PM PST by Lysandru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

Given that our current president seems bound and determined to encourage a nuclear attack on us or our former allies (i.e., Israel,the UK, Poland, etc.) the answer is we do need them. I might also add that determining our national security needs requires more than a finger in the wind and squinting at the horizon-by a damned fool.

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.
-George Orwell


24 posted on 02/15/2011 1:49:34 PM PST by Spok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

How else are we going to world policeman?


25 posted on 02/15/2011 1:49:37 PM PST by ex-snook ("Above all things, truth beareth away the victory")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile
Nope.

All we need is to nuke one trouble spot ... stand firm as the world and the enemy within tries to destroy us for it ... nuke THEM if need be ... stand firm and dare anyone screw with us again.

Yes, it DOES open up the potential of an atomic war, but hey ...

It's a slow death of a thousand cuts that follows the reduction of Americans into silence and inactivity.

Let's just go down swingin'


What's wrong with, " Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead " ... ?

26 posted on 02/15/2011 1:49:45 PM PST by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

Yet another glaring similarity between this regime and the Carter regime. Jimmah canceled the construction of an aircraft carrier while he was in office and significantly scaled back the maintenance availabilities for the ones that were left. It was a serious interruption in the construction schedule for the Nimitz class hulls, and it took President Reagan to turn the machine back on.

Not that Premier Hussien would know the first thing about using either vessel appropriately. I’m amazed he hasn’t already offered to permanently anchor one of our nuclear ships in Haiti to provide free power and a new airport...


27 posted on 02/15/2011 1:50:30 PM PST by Bean Counter (Stout Hearts...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile
Since we don't seem to be defending ourselves anymore, probably not.

ML/NJ

28 posted on 02/15/2011 1:50:51 PM PST by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

Absolutely.


29 posted on 02/15/2011 1:51:18 PM PST by Paperdoll ( On the cutting edge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: K-Stater

As you know the competition between the services is huge. I think we need to spend more wisely. If the Air Force gets one the Navy does not necessarily need one too.


30 posted on 02/15/2011 1:51:50 PM PST by 70th Division (I love my country but fear my government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton

That is true, but we need some traditional forces from the last wars for contingencies. We also need more cyber offensive and defense as well.


31 posted on 02/15/2011 1:52:28 PM PST by wxgesr (I want to be the first person to surf on another planet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Da Coyote

Not to mention getting the federal government out of education entirely, it is a states’ issue. Defunding the EPA entirely. Paring back the IRS dramatically. Cutting at least half the state department (ie the politicians there, leave the embassy guards and the engineers and a small ambassador/consul staff) and ditch all the career SIS washington commies in the main building.

Defund all the arts at the federal level. Defund planned parenthood. Defund the ACLU and unions.

there are more, this just comes to me first.


32 posted on 02/15/2011 1:58:52 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

Last I heard, the USA is the only nation in the free world with carriers.Britain got rid of theirs about a decade ago - ‘too expensive and we can let the US do it’ was the reasoning.


33 posted on 02/15/2011 2:00:10 PM PST by Ophiucus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

Yes. And more fighters and bombers and missiles and tanks.


34 posted on 02/15/2011 2:00:22 PM PST by pissant ((Bachmann 2012 - Freepmail to get on/off PING list))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile
Yes.







Next question?
35 posted on 02/15/2011 2:01:47 PM PST by Redcloak (What's your zombie plan?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

No. Americans elected a muslim. The USA is broke.


36 posted on 02/15/2011 2:03:04 PM PST by Frantzie (HD TV - Total Brain-washing now in High Def. 3-D Coming soon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

Uhm.........Yes we do. That is unless you want to install and staff US air and sea bases all around the globe.


37 posted on 02/15/2011 2:04:05 PM PST by blackdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

If China has a CVN killer maybe we need to think outside the box.

UCAVS launched from Subs
Harder to find and target

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/secret_projects2/project331.htm


38 posted on 02/15/2011 2:05:15 PM PST by Bailee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Ophiucus

Last I heard the American people put a muslim in the white hut. If a nation is dumb enough to do that then what is the point? We are broke too so we cannot afford it.


39 posted on 02/15/2011 2:05:57 PM PST by Frantzie (HD TV - Total Brain-washing now in High Def. 3-D Coming soon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Ophiucus

Last I heard the American people put a muslim in the white hut. If a nation is dumb enough to do that then what is the point? We are broke too so we cannot afford it.


40 posted on 02/15/2011 2:06:00 PM PST by Frantzie (HD TV - Total Brain-washing now in High Def. 3-D Coming soon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

Perhaps...Perhaps not.

I certainly wouldn’t dismiss the need for more of either out of hand. This is especially true of Submarines. Of Aircraft Carriers, however, technology has nearly surpassed it’s time. We now have the potential for aircraft that can fly internationally — even “space planes” in the near future — that would render Carriers obsolete. Furthermore, with the development of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV’s) doing more work, Carriers are not as necessary. And Carriers, in the era of the Carrier-buster missiles developed by China and France make a high profile target for which we currently have no effective counter-measure. We are, I think, seeing the last generation of the Carriers. The Submarines, however, may be around for a while to come.


41 posted on 02/15/2011 2:06:08 PM PST by patriot preacher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: exnavy

42 posted on 02/15/2011 2:10:46 PM PST by ConservativeStatement (Obama "acted stupidly.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: americanophile; All

Subs and Carriers are the best weapons America has...and this is an Army guy saying this.

Subs and Carriers not only are great offensive weapons....they are great defensive weapons, too. And, the US has the major advantage over the rest of the world with its Subs and Carriers

Sounds like the America-Hating Free Trade Communist Globalists want to destroy our military....like they have done with our economy and nation.


43 posted on 02/15/2011 2:11:32 PM PST by UCFRoadWarrior (Newt Gingrich and Chris Matthews: Seperated at Birth??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

Carriers, ships and subs are on a different kind of funding track. Because of their expense and complexity, and because the shipyards can’t just stop and start with any kind of jerky on-off motion, they are on a continuous fiscal track that acts sort of like a steady conveyor belt, year after year.

As a result, projects are always underway, being designed and built over years. Those projects are not nearly as subject to the whims of politicians.

So, to kill the building of a carrier, you’re talking about stopping design on the one that will take its first cruise in about 2025. There are already boats in the process of completion going on right now that have already been paid for.


44 posted on 02/15/2011 2:11:49 PM PST by lurk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile
The carriers in the fleet now are designed for 50 years of operation with the oldest, Nimitz, having just over 10 years left. As a result, there is no rush to replace carriers.

The Ford class come at $10-$15 billion a copy. Gates has already moved to building one every 5 years, instead of every 4, which will still give us carriers 10 in the fleet come 2040.

Also, the F-35 (if Obama lets us have them) can fly off the much smaller America class LDA under construction. I stopped paying attention to subs after the Carter set sail.

We should not slash-and-burn defense. That will get us no where good and, like it or not, defense contracts are jobs programs.

The fact is we are what stands between freedom and tyranny. It's fallen to us to police the world. We spend as much on defense as all our allies combined and then some!

45 posted on 02/15/2011 2:15:04 PM PST by newzjunkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

“Nothing is more provocative to our enemies than a perception of weakness on our part.”

I head that once before, somewhere.


46 posted on 02/15/2011 2:24:51 PM PST by Mr. Jazzy (HA! Not even Bill Maher thinks Odumbo is a Christian! HAHAHAHAHA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

You haven’t had too much of Obama?


47 posted on 02/15/2011 2:31:57 PM PST by cydcharisse (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Ophiucus
Britain decommissioned its last one two months ago, but they're going forward with a new class:

On 25 July 2007 the then Defence Secretary Des Browne, announced the £3.8bn order for the two new carriers.[7] On December 11, 2008, Defence Secretary John Hutton announced that the two ships would enter service one or two years later than the originally planned dates of 2014 and 2016.[8] The in-service date was further extended to 2020 in The Strategic Defence and Security Review 2010.[2] Construction of Queen Elizabeth is, as of 2010[update], well under-way.[9] The Queen Elizabeth class ships will be assembled in the Firth of Forth at Rosyth Royal Dockyard from nine blocks built in six UK shipyards; BAE Systems Surface Ships in Glasgow, Babcock at Appledore, Babcock at Rosyth, A&P in Newcastle, BAE at Portsmouth and Cammell Laird (flight decks) at Birkenhead.[10][11]

Number One dry dock at Rosyth has been modified to accommodate one of the Queen Elizabeth class vessels at one time.[12]

48 posted on 02/15/2011 2:32:57 PM PST by buccaneer81 (ECOMCON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: americanophile

Do we really need more stupid journalists?


49 posted on 02/15/2011 2:36:24 PM PST by mass55th (Courage is being scared to death - but saddling up anyway...John Wayne)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: americanophile
Lawmakers should ask the Navy to lay out (in closed-door hearings, if need be) the precise scenarios in which the United States needs more submarines and aircraft carriers than it already has. They'll find the scenarios are pretty far-fetched.

Since this is from Slate, it'e easy to understand the Baghdad Bob thinking.

However, let's examine the facts that Slate thinks so highly of:
1)NKorea and China are both adding either subs or carriers to their inventory of weaponry
2) Many of the current crop of carriers and subs are old and have outdated systems aboard
3) In many cases, updating these older vessels would cost as much or more than purchasing a new ship
5) Last, would we want to send our young service mn and women to sea in vessels built during WWII? In essence, that's what the morons at Slate want to do. Bad idea.

If it's the budget they're concerned with, let's look at other places we can cut the budget - Get rid of the Depts. of Agriculture, Education and HUD. They are non-esential and provide no useful or measurable services. Get rid of the TSA and transfer the people/funds to immigration and border control. Rollback Congressional salaries, staff and perks. Also, defund Obama's czars. They also cannot point to any useful services they provide - ESPECIALLY for the money it costs us!!!

That's a better start than what Slate suggests.

50 posted on 02/15/2011 2:42:40 PM PST by DustyMoment (Go green - recycle Congress in 2012!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-84 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson