Posted on 10/24/2012 6:52:29 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
My recently retired Father built nuclear subs, then surface ships for Litton Ind for 30 years. Then he built them for Northrop Grummand for five more before he retired.
You don’t want to hear what he has to say about Northrop! Could he be a little old school and grumpy? Maybe, but he still has the same opinion after a few bourbons which means he’s telling the truth!
See, Obama knows about submarines. He really has been paying attention at those intelligence briefings! Take that, you Obama-bashers!
The Modern DECLINE of MY United States Navy BEGAN with George HW Bush and HIS SEC DEFENSE CHENEY.
I was happy to hear Romney point out that the strategy used to be that we could fight two wars simultaneously, but since the 0bama regime took power, one is the limit. I was disappointed that it wasn't pointed out that our troops have been stretched to the limit with many having served 5, 6 or more deployments to the combat zones.
456 P-3s to be replaced by 40 P-8s (if that many). Mine warfare ships to be eliminated. Good luck with that.
Pretty embarassing lack of knowledge by the author here; CGX has been dead for years, and the cruisers will be replaced by the DDG-51 Flight III with the AMDR radar, currently being designed with construction beginning in 2016.
There are a lot of flaws with Flight III (it's going to be incredibly cramped as the DDG-51 hull isn't big enough, and it won't be remotely as capable as CGX) but if you're writing about the Navy for a major website like NRO you should know this stuff.
As much as this guy may be right overall, he loses all credibility the moment he talks about how the Enterprise is being retired early.
The ship was designed for a 25 year service life and is now 50 years old. Her infrastructure is deteriorating, with the worst part being the brittleness in her reactor vessels.
I know people who have recently served on the Ghettoprise. Or the Enterprison. Or the Mobile Chernobyl. The ship has performed phenominal service to this nation far beyond what she was designed for. She’s been rode hard and will be put away wet. The only shame if the situation is that she won’t be saved as a museum.
In addition we led the charge for open homosexuality in the services
Will they have the “Richard Danzig” requirements fulfilled? Specifically coed quarters, reduced standards for the females, and I suppose the “Maubus” areas so the sodomites can service each other while out to sea?
FYI.
That is correct. This is a bi-partisan effort.
Submarines are not ships. They are boats.
And the crossdressers and transsexuals are vying for military service.
Yes, I know the reason (it's impossible to remove the reactor vessels without slicing the hull up) and the logic is sound. I don't care. The ship should be saved, if for no other reason than to atone for the national sin of scrapping her namesake USS Enterprise CV-6.
RE: Submarines are not ships. They are boats.
But aren’t ships, boats?
All ships are boats but not all boats are ships.
Dictionary definition: A boat is a watercraft of any size designed to float or plane, to provide passage across water.
Navy 101: Ships have a pointy end and a blunt end.
Exactly like the previous Obama, Jimmy Carter. The saying we he had back then was “the two things a naval officer needs to learn are Russian and life boat drill”.
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.