Skip to comments.Obama's contemptuous, insulting and factually incorrect comment about Romney's US Navy plan
Posted on 10/23/2012 8:04:26 AM PDT by Jeff Head
President Obama made a very contemptuous, snide comment to Mitt Romney at the foriegn policy debate on October 22, 2012. It involved Romney's plan to increase the size of the US Navy to over 312 ships.
I have read this plan and it is very detailed and it is in repsone to the US Navy leadership indicating that it needed 350 ships to meet its needs.
Obama had used the same arguement, that the Militray requested it, to defend his own miltary plans. His plans were included in a budget that received the destinction of being the most bi-partisn budget ever presented to congress in that it was voted against by 100% of the House and Senate...twice. That's right, not one single representative, Republican or Democrat, voted for the President's budget...and that budget did not address the US Navy requests at all.
President Obama knew all of this when he made the snide, contemptuous and lecturing statment that Governor Romnmey needed to study the US Military more because numbers of assetts is not important in a modern era, saying that we dont have horses or bayonettes any more, but we do have aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines that go beneath the surface, implying that Romney was somehow not "up to speed" on those facts.
Actually, what Obama's sophmoric diatrebe did was reveal his own lack of knoweldge with respect to military matters. For instance, does Obama not know that our Special Forces, in working with the Northern Alliance fought from horse back to defeat the Taliban? Does Obama not know that bayonettes to this day are a continuing and necessary staple for the US Marines and US Army should the need arise, God forbid, for close-in hand to hand fighting? We still have and need those things when necessary, Mr. President, despite your snide remarks.
The fact is, Mitt Romney's plan for the US Navy's future includes the necessary improvements to, acquisition of, and maintenance of our carrier and submarine forces. In addition, his plan is a very detailed plan that meets all of the US Navy needs as requested by the US Navy leadership and planners.
Apparently Obama feels that only he can propose plans that meet the military needs...but his plans were 100% rejected by the US House and Senate...twice.
I happen to know something about the US Navy and the challenges it faces now, and over the next twenty years. I worked during a good part of my career in the defense industry working as a designer and engineer on US Navy acquisitions. My father was a combat veteran US Navy Officer in the PTO (does Barack Obama even know what the "PTO" stands for?) in World War II and then in the naval reserves after the war until the mid 1950s. His entire career was dedicated to designing naval aircarft and missile systems for 48 years at Vought Aeronautics. My son-in-law is career navy. I am a member of the US Naval Institute and have studied US Naval affairs for the last twenty years and written of it often, and particularly for the last 10 years have studied the unprecedented rise of the Chinese Navy, the People's Liberation Army Navy or PLAN.
THE RISING SEA DRAGON IN ASIA
The Chinese are using our trade imbalance to fund the building of a modern, blue water Navy. There is only one sea power on earth their growing navy is meant to challenge and that is us. They have grown their naval strength both qualitatively and quantitatively by 84% over the last ten years. We have shrunk ours by 14%. This is the reality that Mitt Romney is addressing
The level of insult and contempt in a presidential debate by President Obama is almost unprecedented. It underscores the point that President Obama has no acceptable plan, and reveals his anger over his inability to produce one, while Mitt Romney has produced a very viable and detailed plan for the US Navy for the future.
All Americans need to know the truth about what happened on that stage Monday night, October 22, 2012. Romney's plan for the US Navy was not a "game of battleship." it was not something "the military had no asked for," and it was not a throw back to 100 years ago. Please pass this around to as many individuals as you can.
Here is a link to the interview of the Romney staff regaring Mitt Romney's plan for the US Navy proposed.
ROMNEY'S PLAN FOR THE GROWTH & MAINTENANCE OF THE US NAVY
Again Mitt Romney's plan for the US Navy is measured, knoweldgable, and will be effective for the growth and maintenance of the US Navy to meet the continuing and rising challenges it faces. Please make sure your friends and neighbors know about this and right the wrong that was perpetrated at the debate by President Obama who seems intent on weakening the US Military posture around the world as a way of trying to make nice with adversaries and enemies who wish us all harm. That level of appeasement has never workled, and it will not work now. If we fail to learn from history, we will be almost assured of repeating it.
He is left with nothing but insulting childish attacks and gimmicks to try and tear down well thought out, and professional plans that he is incapable of bringing forward himself.
FYI...the truth about Romney’s US Navy plans.
Please spread it around.
Hi, Jeff. Romney was correct to tie a strong defense to a strong economy.
The only reason Obama is worried about bayonets and battleships is because with his killer economy we can’t afford them.
I doubt Obama has ever held a bayonet, much less fixed one.His comment about the world has changed is BS. Influence is and always will be enforced by “boots on the ground”, And the WILL to shed blood. Which has more to do with “horses and bayonets” than “ships and airplanes”. The later approach is Bill Clinton’s way to wage war from five miles high, to avoid criticism for US casualties.
The president also showed his lack of understanding of the Navy in his snide remarks and also by a point he made later in the debate:
1. When he was talking about the Navy and dismissing the need for more ships, he mentioned new technology alluding to the less we need to rely on straight numbers. Well, we have fewer aircraft carriers doing more than ever before, which puts a strain on the men, women and equipment and also increases our vulnerability. The commander in chief should understand this and a well informed CinC wouldn’t have argued against an increase.
2. Not long after deriding Romney for wanting more ships, the president talked about keeping the oceans safe for commerce. A well informed CinC would know it’s the ships that keep the sea lanes open (Mahan 101). Fewer ships equal less stability on the high seas.
Pretty pathetic if you ask me.
Your point about the strain on men and equipment in a smaller service is spot on. Problem is Obama justifies it with his “strategy driven” policy lie. Mitt did a fair job of pointing out Obama changed the strategy from a two war readiness (fight-hold-fight) to a one war strategy. It was obvious to me at the time that the driver for this strategy change by the Obama admin was not the threat environment, but rather the desire to have the strategy map to his military reduction plan. O is a liar, a manipulator, and an arrogant POS.
Agree completely, Jeff. And even as Obama was saying it, I thought of you and was wishing Romney would/could throw the Chinese Navy’s growth back at him (acknowledging that anything I know about it, I learned from you, of course.)
Pot, kettle, black.
conceited and overconfident of knowledge but poorly informed and immature
Good morning, Jeff.
Just an aside here...I hope you are feeling better these days.
My best regards.
B U M P
John Hackett and the other authors of The Third World War, published as the Carter fatuousness -- or should I say, the "peace Democrats" McGovernik/Stalinist scheming -- was bringing the Western militaries to the brink of straight-up military challenge and defeat by the Soviets, commented extensively on how this kind of scheming and plotting corrupted Western contributions to NATO in the 60's and 70's. The fish rotted from the head: the constant "reorganizations" downward of the NATO force structure were always undertaken by Labour and Left pols fascinated by the political allure of, and Communist union-led pressure for, Bread to the Masses.
Now we're doing it, and politicians like Barky are the ones inducing the rot in formerly solid wood.
Cart / horse.
The only reason for "Bread to the Masses" politics is to deprive the Forces of Reaction of the resources necessary to maintain their militaries, thus opening the door to violent revolution by the vanguard leadership.
Coffeehouse pukes and layabouts, getting other people to kill still other people so they can take power and have May Day parades. Great.
Thanks for asking.
I have my ups and downs like anyone who suffers from the left overs of a serious bout with malignant cancer...but I am grateful to God in Heaven and to the faith of so many to be alive. Each day is a blessing.
To be able to continue to work and provide for my family, to ejoy the company of my dear wife and five grown kids and their spouses and kids...esecially to be able to spend time with the grandkids.
God bless you for asking and for your thoughts and prayers on our behalf. May He who is mighty to save return the blessing to you ten fold.
Held a bayonet? I never even see him handle a knife and fork. He’s always shoving food down his face with his hands.
Hey, A.A. Long time no hear/no see. Thanks for dropping by an BUMPing the thread for me, despite your contrary opinion.
You know what they say about opinions, though? ...well, let’s just say that everyone has one.
Hope you find the time to smile a bit today and enjoy life.
Thanks, bro. Hope all is well with you and yours down there.
One day I will make sure and coincide my annual MD Anderson checkup woith the shoot. Would love to knock some cans and other targets down with you guys.
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
Thank you for your reply.
I have been worried about you for a very long, long time.
I am grateful to hear you are much better and am praying for a full recovery.
You need to continue soaring with the eagles.
My love to you and your family.