I have been "active" in the Reserve these past years, plus work as a Civil Servant at a Naval Shipyard ... so I have "my finger on the pulse" and I can tell you - the military have lots of love and respect for Reagan, Bush(41) and Bush(43) - and nothing but contempt for Clinton.
Look I've posted this before and I'll say it again. I blame GHW Bush, Bill Clinton, both of their S.O.D.'s both houses during those terms and both parties sitting during those terms. Even when the GOP won the houses they sat there like a bunch of idiots letting Clinton put it deeper and deeper simply because they thought it would make him look bad and them look good and didn't give a care one way or another if any ship floated or gun fired.Bush should have fought harder. He was no Ronald Reagan mainly because he was against most of Reagans policies. The crapolla that candidates shouldn't speak evil against the party chosen is hilarious Bush Sr done it till the day Reagan made him running mate.
Go back and read that article I linked. We were down to 12 carriers at the end of Bush sr SOD Aspin wanted 10 Borda said 12. I think W wants 10 as well. Like I said if we are supposedly entering an extended conflict somebody better start acting like it then and do the necessary build up. But let's address the real issue here. It is the constitutional duty of government to provide for the nations defense. That alone above all else should be priority #1. If we ask a sailor to spend 6 months operating those 8 boilers then we should make sure those 8 boilers and related machinery and piping are safe enough so that sailor and half his shipmates are blown to bits and burned to death by a steam break because some politician wanted to save a buck for the national forest or faith based programs. Forget that we are supposed to be at war right? Our defense is suffering and all aviable money should be going there till the level of readiness is sufficent that we can handle problems without calling up reserves all the time and equipment maintenance get's done in a timely manner. The patch and go military we have been using for the past 13 years needs to be halted. The maintenance needs to be done properly that means down time.
Look I support all military including down to the local NG's. Why are we using them as deployed troops? That is not the same thing as a combat ready unit and you know it. NG's especially Army NG's are vets from the Navy and Air Force as well and probably make up 50% of the units. These guys never touched an M-16 except with blanks, never had combat training and yet we allow them to be deployed as ready troops? This garbage started under Pappy Bush because the military had already been down graded to that point. If you see nothing wrong with a carrier having on two of it's generators functional, fuel problems and no radar as a ship ready for a 6 month deployment then me and you have very opposing views on combat readiness. I'll explain to you why there was no radar in the article I posted. With two generators that meant no chillers were functional. Chillers are the ships airconditioning system. No air conditioning no electronics believe me on that one I spent 4 years in the AC&R shop.
The gyro would have possibly been functional as it's location had a back up A/C unit. Now when both parties of congress and the senate as well as POTUS start addressing this problem with the seriousness it deserves ahead of spending money on nonsense issues some even beyond legitimate function of government then I'll reconsider.
This nation has been cursed with legions of lazy people who vote Democrat. The Democrats in Congress cut spending for the military (except their own little pork barrel projects that the military want). Republican Presidents have never had a clear Republican House and Senate to help them steer the "ship of state" onto a proper course.
Where were YOU when the 1994 Republican House and Republican Senate were pilloried by the Democrats and the Media for their "Medicare Cuts", "School Lunch Cuts", "Shutting down the Government" .. .. that effort cut the heart out of the conservative movement ... and too few conservatives were speaking out against the lies. Where were you when the Democrats forced the military cuts onto Bush(41). Were you rallying your friends and family to speak out, letter write, etc.?? Were you writing to Bush to ask him to "stay the course" and resist the Democrat Congress.
It is convenient to blame someone else ... but fact is, it is more your own DAMN FAULT than it is Bush's. He probably wondered where the moral support was when he got boxed into corner after corner by the Democraps and the Media, and groups failed to speak out to support him.
I go back to the bottom line . .. Bush respected the military, and did not mis-use them. He tried, and for that, I will forgive him his mistakes. Clinton - his actions weren't mistakes, they were deliberate, and are unforgiveable. You lack clarity to see the difference, you lack charity to forgive an honorable man, and thus you show you lack honor and don't deserve any charity for YOUR mistakes.
I will retract this harsh condemnation against you if you can show me that the PUBLIC wanted different than what the Democraps delivered and the public fought against the Congress for more military funding. Or show me that Bush wanted the same or less military spending than the Congress forced him to accept ... but absent that .. . you have no claim to be accusing others when in fact you too might be part of the "silent masses" that silently acquiesed to the gradual deterioration of the military because no one stood up to the Democraps and called them for what they are ... "TRAITORS and SOCIALISTS". It is convenient to "BLAME" ... but what the heck have you done that is so good and helpful to the military? Right now, you seem to give aid and comfort to the Democraps - ("everyone does it" and "it started with Bush" is the Democrap mantra to shift blame away from Clinton.) Heck, the military growth started under Reagan, but the peak spending year was in 1986, so some Democraps say that the decline started with Reagan in 1987 - another variation of "it's not Clinton's fault".
I would suggest that you look at G.H.W.Bush's military record, his record of service, including V.P. under Reagan, how he waged the Gulf War . ... and give him the respect that he has EARNED ... and cut him some slack over his mistakes. I have yet to find any serious conservative who is ready to trash R.Reagan for the 1983 Beirut barracks massacre ... give R.Reagan's overall record ...he earned the respect of the military.
Mike