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.
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.
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
Sure, who needs that old navy anyway?
200 should be plenty.
For one destroyer, thousands could get food stamps.