User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/13/2023 6:45:20 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: makes ya wonder just exactly ALL THE MONEY THE SERVICES GET IS GOING.............. People are expensive. Don't wonder why AI and remote warfare has so much traction. Also, the big boys LM, RT, GD etc never overlook an opportunity to squeeze more $$$ out of your pocket. It's expensive to say "USA #1!" |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2023 6:48:23 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: People are expensive. Don't wonder why AI and remote warfare has so much traction. It's a hope against hope. If we can't recruit Joe White Boy now, what makes us think the DOD will be employer of choice when he's a multiple credentialed CompSci expert? We going to start a draft of those people? I guess we won't be able to laugh at the videos of fleeing Russians anymore. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2023 8:16:01 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 1989-1993 disagrees with you. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The old saying, "If you want peace, prepare for war" is quaint -- but the United States has NEVER been ready for a major war. Panama, the Philippines, and Desert Storm -- just prior to Haiti. U.S. military casualties in the Panama invasion were 23 killed and 325 wounded. How many US soldiers died in the Gulf War? Of the 219 (212 men and 7 women) US casualties, 154 were killed in battle and 65 died from non-battle causes. Thirty-five battle deaths were a result of friendly fire. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2023 9:03:36 PM EDT
[#4]
You reap what you sow.
I knew an officer that was an amphib driver in GWOT. The USMC went off to be a second land army and the amphibs were floating around empty for years. Now the Commandant wants to be a second land army at a time when the big Navy figures it is getting pacing based on fighting the kinetic fight against Taiwan. That's going to 30 years of the Department of the Navy neglecting their amphibs and their customer not really caring. Meanwhile the Army's rapid mobility lift is multi-use and un-cuttable. I refer to C-17s. We could argue whether America's 911 force is SOCOM or the Army, but it is clearly not the USMC. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2023 9:18:54 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I've seen a lot of articles of late about all the russian equipment that failed on the battlefield due to rotting tires, non-existent maintenance, old and outdated gear in general. Seems like that dragon has settled into our services as well. Gee, kinda makes ya wonder just exactly ALL THE MONEY THE SERVICES GET IS GOING.............. Don't get me wrong , I totally support the military mission as I understand it to be. But just as with everything else.......... WHERE IS THE GODDAMN MOTHERFUCKING ACCOUNTABILITY FOR ALL THIS BULLSHIT???? Not gonna happen but Task Force Smith version 2 will |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2023 9:25:55 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You reap what you sow. I knew an officer that was an amphib driver in GWOT. The USMC went off to be a second land army and the amphibs were floating around empty for years. Now the Commandant wants to be a second land army at a time when the big Navy figures it is getting pacing based on fighting the kinetic fight against Taiwan. That's going to 30 years of the Department of the Navy neglecting their amphibs and their customer not really caring. Meanwhile the Army's rapid mobility lift is multi-use and un-cuttable. I refer to C-17s. We could argue whether America's 911 force is SOCOM or the Army, but it is clearly not the USMC. During the GWOT the USMC filled request for forces (RFFs) that were asks by the various combatant commanders through the Joint Staff’s Global Force Management systems, those RFFs were approved by Sectary of Defense thus turning them into orders to deploy forces. I know of several and can cite two specific cases were those RFFs initially were given to the Army but they reclama-ed them and than those RFFs were tasked to the USMC because the USA stated positioned was they could not generate forces in a timely manner. One of them brought my MEU to Afghanistan in 2008 and the other RFF 825 sent 1st Battalion, 7th Marines out to western AFG causing some of the highest loses suffered by one battalion in Afghanistan to that point The CMC wants the exact opposite of a second land Army, he wants the USMC to operate as the land component of US naval forces in the ramp-up and prosecution of a maritime campaign. Which does not require traditional amphib shipping Unfortunately traditional amphib shipping still is required for both the force-in-readiness mission that combatant commanders keep asking for and the JFEO mission that are written into multiple OPLANs. If the GCCs stop asking for the forces and the OPLANs are revised then the requirement goes away. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2023 9:33:30 PM EDT
[#7]
Lhd's are in a weird spot. They don't get the funding that carriers get, and they need way more logistics than ddg's and cg's get. Why would you ever prioritize a lhd funding and logistics over a carrier?
Carriers nearly do everything better. And are more of an asset. Big problem is quantity over quality. Literally too many ships. Another is funding. Another is contracting work to lowest bidder Another is material procurement Last but most importantly, the navy isn't taking care of their sailors. The navy has a massive retention and recruitment issue right now. They just erased fitness standards to retain 1500 sailors. They are extending billots at sea. Nobody wants to stay in because sailors are always getting shit on. The boxer is doing an investigation for suspect of sailors literally sabatoging the ship to stop It from getting underway. In the past 2 years the boxer has been underway for 7 days. On my current ship, ddg type, I've been underway for around 700 days the past 2 years -ET1. 13 years and current AD |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 8:24:55 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Lhd's are in a weird spot. They don't get the funding that carriers get, and they need way more logistics than ddg's and cg's get. Why would you ever prioritize a lhd funding and logistics over a carrier? Carriers nearly do everything better. And are more of an asset. Big problem is quantity over quality. Literally too many ships. Another is funding. Another is contracting work to lowest bidder Another is material procurement Last but most importantly, the navy isn't taking care of their sailors. The navy has a massive retention and recruitment issue right now. They just erased fitness standards to retain 1500 sailors. They are extending billots at sea. Nobody wants to stay in because sailors are always getting shit on. The boxer is doing an investigation for suspect of sailors literally sabatoging the ship to stop It from getting underway. In the past 2 years the boxer has been underway for 7 days. On my current ship, ddg type, I've been underway for around 700 days the past 2 years -ET1. 13 years and current AD For being in the USN for 13 years, you seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the differences in missions between a LHD and a CVN. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 8:51:17 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: During the GWOT the USMC filled request for forces (RFFs) that were asks by the various combatant commanders through the Joint Staff’s Global Force Management systems, those RFFs were approved by Sectary of Defense thus turning them into orders to deploy forces. I know of several and can cite two specific cases were those RFFs initially were given to the Army but they reclama-ed them and than those RFFs were tasked to the USMC because the USA stated positioned was they could not generate forces in a timely manner. One of them brought my MEU to Afghanistan in 2008 and the other RFF 825 sent 1st Battalion, 7th Marines out to western AFG causing some of the highest loses suffered by one battalion in Afghanistan to that point The CMC wants the exact opposite of a second land Army, he wants the USMC to operate as the land component of US naval forces in the ramp-up and prosecution of a maritime campaign. Which does not require traditional amphib shipping Unfortunately traditional amphib shipping still is required for both the force-in-readiness mission that combatant commanders keep asking for and the JFEO mission that are written into multiple OPLANs. If the GCCs stop asking for the forces and the OPLANs are revised then the requirement goes away. GFM is a bitch. Too many people in positions of authority only see it as a means to build their ‘rice bowl’ bigger. I’ve seen the unconstrained RFF’s that would not only empty the entire current and future buckets, but could only be justified with ‘the GCC wants it’ (cough, cough, CENTCOM cough, cough). The underlying issue is with the GFM being OPLAN driven, the required forces cannot be generated as fast as the OPLANs can be rewritten. The demand for specific forces 2 years out is well and good, except it can take a decade for those forces to be created. By that time, the NMS has changed along with GCC priorities and OPLANs rewritten. Constant tail chasing. GFMIG and FADM be damned. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 9:02:19 AM EDT
[#10]
OFRP has failed.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 9:04:32 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: OFRP has failed. OPRP from L type shipping was designed to support a 1.0 ARG-MEU cycle to CENTCOM |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 9:23:31 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: For being in the USN for 13 years, you seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the differences in missions between a LHD and a CVN. A CVN has a real world mission and the other has a mission similar to Kiwi boot polish and Leatherneck magazine? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 9:59:12 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A CVN has a real world mission and the other has a mission similar to Kiwi boot polish and Leatherneck magazine? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: For being in the USN for 13 years, you seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the differences in missions between a LHD and a CVN. A CVN has a real world mission and the other has a mission similar to Kiwi boot polish and Leatherneck magazine? ARG-MEUs have been probably doing significant real world work over the years. The ships have been optimized for the force-in-readiness mission, I am not sure how well the can do the actual JFEO mission though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 10:03:18 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: GFM is a bitch. I’ve seen the unconstrained RFF’s that would not only empty the entire current and future buckets, but could only be justified with ‘the GCC wants it’ (cough, cough, CENTCOM cough, cough). The underlying issue is with the GFM being OPLAN driven, the required forces cannot be generated as fast as the OPLANs can be rewritten. The demand for specific forces 2 years out is well and good, except it can take a decade for those forces to be created. By that time, the NMS has changed along with GCC priorities and OPLANs rewritten. Constant tail chasing. GFMIG and FADM be damned. Each administration has its own National Security Strategy. Each Secretary of Defense has his own National Defense Strategy. Each Chairman has his own National Military Strategy. Each unified and specified command has his idea how to execute, given the forces he owns or can request-borrow. NONE of them is hugely different from the last. Strategy is spelled with a dollar sign. Just what, no kidding, is vital to address the existential threats to the United States, and what is pork and welfare for Congress critters, Senators, Service bosses, and the military complex that wants to sell things and make ignorant money? For staff officers recommending what and how to juggle (at whatever activity or level) there is no perfect. Enemies and politics also have a vote (i.e., who predicted the current Ukraine invasion?). The Navy's ship and personnel readiness problems are historic. For a National Security Strategy since 2012 stating the United States is shifting attention to Asia (with a naval and air focus) you couldn't tell looking at the Navy's present woes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 12:26:41 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Meanwhile the Army's rapid mobility lift is multi-use and un-cuttable. I refer to C-17s. We could argue whether America's 911 force is SOCOM or the Army, but it is clearly not the USMC. You have an extraordinarily charitable view of the C-17s, their abilities, their primary tasking, and how USTC and AMC view them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 12:28:57 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: GFM is a bitch. Too many people in positions of authority only see it as a means to build their ‘rice bowl’ bigger. I’ve seen the unconstrained RFF’s that would not only empty the entire current and future buckets, but could only be justified with ‘the GCC wants it’ (cough, cough, CENTCOM cough, cough). The underlying issue is with the GFM being OPLAN driven, the required forces cannot be generated as fast as the OPLANs can be rewritten. The demand for specific forces 2 years out is well and good, except it can take a decade for those forces to be created. By that time, the NMS has changed along with GCC priorities and OPLANs rewritten. Constant tail chasing. GFMIG and FADM be damned. Good summation. I think the Joint Staff has consistently failed in really holding the GCC/FCCs feet to the fire on realistic resourcing and planning, and just kept building out OPLANs less and less tethered to reality. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 12:40:56 PM EDT
[#17]
During the second Clinton administration my ship was so short on funds we didn't have paint brushes to spread the paint we could get to prevent corrosion. We didn't have the money for the machine oil for the million dollar gyrocompass so just skip the maintenance. But the worst was we didn't have money to buy toilet paper. When my LPO came to me and told me that I sent a guy to the commissary to buy a jumbo box for the division.
We kept a hidden personally purchased supply in an empty locker until the ship bought paper again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 12:43:56 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You have an extraordinarily charitable view of the C-17s, their abilities, their primary tasking, and how USTC and AMC view them. If this is the case then we need to have a way to replace C-17s when they break. There are not any more being built. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 12:44:50 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: All the world's forces are falling apart in some way or were never much to begin with. The one great soviet union is no more. The Russian GDP is about equivalent to Italy's. China can't field a blue water navy, much less get their aircraft carrier under way. Great Britain has to rotate ships in and out of service because they can't afford to run them all at the same time. The Cold War saw spending on an unprecedented scale. That is all over now. 75% of the kids can't get in the services, and the military has to compete with the remaining 25% against $122K a year states like Washington pay people to not work. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 12:47:34 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 75% of the kids can't get in the services, and the military has to compete with the remaining 25% against $122K a year states like Washington pay people to not work. Looks like UBI >>>> AVF. Well, too bad for the DOD. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 12:58:47 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Strategy is spelled with a dollar sign. This is a true-ism that most idealistic officers never quite get. One of my previous bosses told me when I got orders to Pentagon one piece of advice you need to know about the Pentagon. It is not about the money, it’s all about the money. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 12:59:26 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Looks like UBI >>>> AVF. Well, too bad for the DOD. I’m too lazy to post the link but a study indicated white make Democrats had the least likely interest in military service lower than black Democrats and white female democrats so I’m guessing it was never in the cards UBI or not. I’m more delighted to see the demonstrable decade long evidence that opening combat arms positions to women has done fuck all to fill those positions or increase recruiting overall. Now DOD is recommending that women be sourced for junior combat leadership since females are now over 60% of most college student populations. Lean into that idea DOD 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 1:02:45 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If this is the case then we need to have a way to replace C-17s when they break. There are not any more being built. GD has a solution - Not a problem three gorges dam, harbor freight, the Chinese haven’t fought in decades and lost to Vietnam, Peter Zeihan  https://www.ar15.com/forums/general/Why-Are-We-Losing-The-Ship-Building-Race-To-China-/5-2617285/?r=103251871&page=6&anc=103251871#i103251871
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 1:11:52 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: GD has a solution - Not a problem three gorges dam, harbor freight, the Chinese haven’t fought in decades and lost to Vietnam, Peter Zeihan Graveyard, Whistling Past. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 1:14:04 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Graveyard, Whistling Past. The latest insane post literally stated “when has China and Russia ever been friends” at this point I can’t tell whether it’s trolling, China sympathizers or absolute stupidity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 1:53:22 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: If this is the case then we need to have a way to replace C-17s when they break. There are not any more being built. GD has a solution - Not a problem three gorges dam, harbor freight, the Chinese haven't fought in decades and lost to Vietnam, Peter Zeihan. GD's solution is "Battleships". |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 1:59:41 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: GD's solution is "Battleships". I thought GD’s solution was Peter Zeihan collapsed China already or to gut the defense department because military industrial complex and the boogaloo is happening any day now despite their Hawaiian shirts collecting dust while the big guy collects his 10% and Arizona gets a new governor 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 2:42:08 PM EDT
[#28]
Amphibs have been the Rust Bucket Fleet of the Navy going back decades
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 3:06:09 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You have an extraordinarily charitable view of the C-17s, their abilities, their primary tasking, and how USTC and AMC view them. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Meanwhile the Army's rapid mobility lift is multi-use and un-cuttable. I refer to C-17s. We could argue whether America's 911 force is SOCOM or the Army, but it is clearly not the USMC. You have an extraordinarily charitable view of the C-17s, their abilities, their primary tasking, and how USTC and AMC view them. Their abilities are a well known quantity, but it is a charitable view of the crew quals. Tarmac to tarmac is the best they can guarantee as they suck at maintaining airdrop or dirt strip quals. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 3:21:35 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: ... the Joint Staff has consistently failed in really holding the GCC/FCCs feet to the fire on realistic resourcing and planning, and just kept building out OPLANs less and less tethered to reality. They advise, suggest, and coordinate, but have NO authority, per se. Joint Plans and Orders are signed by the Secretary of Defense. How each CINC executes those taskings and orders from the SECDEF dictates what they ask for. The Service Chiefs (in this case the Secretary of the Navy as the force provider) is supposed to tell the Secretary of Defense, President, and Congress what he needs to support the CINCs. Each CINC testifies before Congress on why he needs the things he wants funded. The Air Force is currently telling the chain of command they need to retire more airplanes to buy future airplanes that haven't been designed yet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 3:25:54 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Chairman, the Joint Chiefs, and the Joint Staff are NOT in the chain of command between the President and Secretary of Defense and the Specified and Unified Commanders. They advise, suggest, and coordinate, but have NO authority, per se. Joint Plans and Orders are technically signed by the Secretary of Defense. How each CINC executes those dictates what they ask for. The Service Chiefs (in this case the Secretary of the Navy as the force provider) is supposed to tell the Secretary of Defense, President, and Congress what he needs to support the CINCs. The Air Force is currently telling the chain of command they need to retire more airplanes to buy future airplanes that haven't been designed yet. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: ... the Joint Staff has consistently failed in really holding the GCC/FCCs feet to the fire on realistic resourcing and planning, and just kept building out OPLANs less and less tethered to reality. They advise, suggest, and coordinate, but have NO authority, per se. Joint Plans and Orders are technically signed by the Secretary of Defense. How each CINC executes those dictates what they ask for. The Service Chiefs (in this case the Secretary of the Navy as the force provider) is supposed to tell the Secretary of Defense, President, and Congress what he needs to support the CINCs. The Air Force is currently telling the chain of command they need to retire more airplanes to buy future airplanes that haven't been designed yet. Correct, and there is only 1 non-uniformed person in the chain of command, POTUS. SECDEF is a Title X official and a force provider but not an operational official. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 3:27:29 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Correct, and there is only 1 non-uniformed person in the chain of command, POTUS. SECDEF is a Title X official and a force provider but not an operational official. §113. Secretary of Defense (a)(1) There is a Secretary of Defense, who is the head of the Department of Defense, appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. ... (b) The Secretary is the principal assistant to the President in all matters relating to the Department of Defense. Subject to the direction of the President and to this title and section 2 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3002) he has authority, direction, and control over the Department of Defense. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 3:31:35 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The President and the Secretary of Defense are both the civilian National Command Authority, both specified in Title 10. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Correct, and there is only 1 non-uniformed person in the chain of command, POTUS. SECDEF is a Title X official and a force provider but not an operational official. SECDEF and all the Service Sectaries are Title X Officials whose mission is provide forces (train, man, equip and educate) they are not in the operational chain of command, that flows from POTUS to the GCC or Functional Area CC who has COCOM authority. The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) is responsible for policy development, planning, resource management and program evaluation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 3:38:09 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: SECDEF and all the Service Sectaries are Title X Officials whose mission is provide forces (train, man, equip and educate) they are not in the operational chain of command, that flows from POTUS to the GCC or Functional Area CC who has COCOM authority. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 3:44:26 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) is not THE Secretary of Defense (the person and position). Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: SECDEF and all the Service Sectaries are Title X Officials whose mission is provide forces (train, man, equip and educate) they are not in the operational chain of command, that flows from POTUS to the GCC or Functional Area CC who has COCOM authority. I think you are right, but for some reason I remember an OPLAW article about civilian authority of command, and in that is cites POTUS as the only non-unformed person with command authority. Civilians could have supervisory authority but could not exercise command authority |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 3:47:02 PM EDT
[#36]
After getting rid of tanks, MPs, scout/sniper platoons...
It sounds like the commandant's vision is to simply be shipboard security and to show the flag here or there around the world. I really don't think having Marines on float is that big a deal now. They've divested themselves of the role. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 3:49:14 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You reap what you sow. I knew an officer that was an amphib driver in GWOT. The USMC went off to be a second land army and the amphibs were floating around empty for years. Now the Commandant wants to be a second land army at a time when the big Navy figures it is getting pacing based on fighting the kinetic fight against Taiwan. That's going to 30 years of the Department of the Navy neglecting their amphibs and their customer not really caring. Meanwhile the Army's rapid mobility lift is multi-use and un-cuttable. I refer to C-17s. We could argue whether America's 911 force is SOCOM or the Army, but it is clearly not the USMC. The current commandant seems to want the opposite. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 3:55:47 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Humanitarian missions, that's about all the Marines will be good for soon. Took away all the tanks, most arty, some aircraft ,snipers, ....crayons are about all that's left.  Crayons are all the Marines need. They'll draw so many dicks & dickbutts all over on the 'enemy' they won't know what to do. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 4:43:47 PM EDT
[#39]
Twenty odd years fighting desert war has left the Navy and Marine Corps ill prepared for sea duties.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 5:44:23 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: ... civilian authority of command, and in that is cites POTUS as the only non-unformed person with command authority. Civilians could have supervisory authority but could not exercise command authority Quote HistoryQuoted: ... civilian authority of command, and in that is cites POTUS as the only non-unformed person with command authority. Civilians could have supervisory authority but could not exercise command authority Quoted: Twenty odd years fighting desert war has left the Navy and Marine Corps ill prepared for sea duties. If it's not pre-positioned in the Indo-Pacific already it's got to come from an Asia-Pacific depot, or all the way from the "Zone of the Interior" -- the continental United States. We don't have enough ships and planes (even with a wartime activation of the Civil Reserve Air Fleet and the maritime reserve) to feed a land war in Asia. Every drop of fuel pumped in the Asia-Pacific Command was shipped and stored by the Army. No Army, no bullets, fuel, and groceries. Reagan's dream of a 600-ship navy was to contain and defeat the Soviet fleet anywhere on the planet. We're somewhere around 300-350, and struggling to keep them operational. The Chinese have the largest ship-building infrastructure in the world, but they don't need a 600-ship fleet -- the entire PLA Navy deploys into the "First Island Chain" off their doorstep. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 6:01:39 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Navy has been its own worst enemy as far as going to Congress to build the fleet. Congressional Research Service says the Navy's at around a 1:3 ratio now, with aging ships (1 in port or overhaul while the others are at sea, training, preparing, or recovering). CRS says an ideal ratio is closer to 1:5 -- but the Navy cannot man them. The reserve mothball fleet is in even worse condition. The Army has been slashing its ship fleet even faster than the Navy. The problem for Transportation Command is everything needed to fight a war on the other side of the planet (food, fuel, bullets, troops, and vehicles) needs to go by ship. The old saying, "If you want peace, prepare for war" is quaint -- but the United States has NEVER been ready for a major war. Strategy is spelled with dollar signs. The Navy doesn't really have much of a mothball fleet left at this point. When Rumsfeld was SecDef most of it was scrapped, sunk as a target, or sold off (and the active navy shrank to its smallest since the bgeinning of the modern Navy in the 1880s). Ships since have tended to be discarded instead of placed in reserve and at this point the number of ships in reserve is pretty small. If we exclude stricken warships and other vessels that are still in the Navy's possession and in storage (and which get no special preservation measures), the reserve fleet literally consists of two LHAs and that's it. It has some Ticos, the Kitty Hawk, a few amphibious warships, a few frigates, a few submarines, a few auxiliaries, and a bunch of yard craft in its possession but not on the Navy List anymore. Some of the subs and the other nuclear stuff in its possession are in the process of dismantling, as all nuclear vessels are listed in Category Z reserve until they are completely dismantled. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 6:03:57 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: McCarthy already confronting Biden over debt ceiling, I can see DOD budget getting axed in a deal to come to a budget agreement Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Simple: DoD is underfunded, and Congress (and this administration) sucks. McCarthy already confronting Biden over debt ceiling, I can see DOD budget getting axed in a deal to come to a budget agreement The two biggest sources of spending, which are what are bankrupting us (Social Security and Medicare), were taken off of the table by McCarthy (and honestly, I'm not sure Republicans have or ever will have the political capital to seriously do otherwise unless they are basically collapsing), which pretty much leaves the DoD and Medicaid as the next largest sources of spending from which to cut. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 6:17:51 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The two biggest sources of spending, which are what are bankrupting us (Social Security and Medicare), were taken off of the table by McCarthy (and honestly, I'm not sure Republicans have or ever will have the political capital to seriously do otherwise unless they are basically collapsing), which pretty much leaves the DoD and Medicaid as the next largest sources of spending from which to cut. Would cuts from those two mollify both sides of the aisle or is another impasse likely? https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/house/mccarthy-spurns-bidens-budget-dont-play-games-debt  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 6:19:31 PM EDT
[#44]
The Presidential Budget proposal was 3.5 percent, with inflation at 6 or more. It’s already in effect a cut.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 6:22:48 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Chairman, the Joint Chiefs, and the Joint Staff are NOT in the chain of command between the President and Secretary of Defense and the Specified and Unified Commanders. They advise, suggest, and coordinate, but have NO authority, per se. Joint Plans and Orders are signed by the Secretary of Defense. How each CINC executes those taskings and orders from the SECDEF dictates what they ask for. The Service Chiefs (in this case the Secretary of the Navy as the force provider) is supposed to tell the Secretary of Defense, President, and Congress what he needs to support the CINCs. Each CINC testifies before Congress on why he needs the things he wants funded. The Air Force is currently telling the chain of command they need to retire more airplanes to buy future airplanes that haven't been designed yet. I think you glossed over the "and coordinate." The Joint Staff has the responsibility to ensure nesting, and referee resource allocation in the first instance and in most cases day to day not managed by DIRLATH. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 6:25:24 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think you are right, but for some reason I remember an OPLAW article about civilian authority of command, and in that is cites POTUS as the only non-unformed person with command authority. Civilians could have supervisory authority but could not exercise command authority Yes, this is why the directors of entities like DLA or NSA (Combat Support Agencies) are uniformed members. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 6:25:35 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think you glossed over the "and coordinate." The Joint Staff has the responsibility to ensure nesting, and referee resource allocation in the first instance and in most cases day to day not managed by DIRLATH. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The Chairman, the Joint Chiefs, and the Joint Staff are NOT in the chain of command between the President and Secretary of Defense and the Specified and Unified Commanders. They advise, suggest, and coordinate, but have NO authority, per se. Joint Plans and Orders are signed by the Secretary of Defense. How each CINC executes those taskings and orders from the SECDEF dictates what they ask for. The Service Chiefs (in this case the Secretary of the Navy as the force provider) is supposed to tell the Secretary of Defense, President, and Congress what he needs to support the CINCs. Each CINC testifies before Congress on why he needs the things he wants funded. The Air Force is currently telling the chain of command they need to retire more airplanes to buy future airplanes that haven't been designed yet. I think you glossed over the "and coordinate." The Joint Staff has the responsibility to ensure nesting, and referee resource allocation in the first instance and in most cases day to day not managed by DIRLATH. The JS also implemented the synchronizer function within the last 5 years and have gone so far as establishing the Joint Fires Element at JS to coordinate global fires. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 6:36:21 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Simple: DoD is underfunded, and Congress (and this administration) sucks. LOmotherfuckinL That's the wrongest thing I've ever seen on this site in 18 years. PLEASE tell me my sarcasm meter needs calibrated. The DOD is a LOT of things but underfunded GOD damned sure ain't one of them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 6:45:40 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: After getting rid of tanks, MPs, scout/sniper platoons... It sounds like the commandant's vision is to simply be shipboard security and to show the flag here or there around the world. I really don't think having Marines on float is that big a deal now. They've divested themselves of the role. Tanks are not very amphibious especially upgraded variants that we didn’t even have, MP battalions only went away not all of the PMO MOS’s, and scout platoons are still a battalion asset. I think you need to read more into what a MAGTF provides and the transitioning mission of the USMC. The commandant’s plans coincide with this shift. Changes suck but it’s not a bad thing to have leadership focusing on the next fight instead of the previous. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/15/2023 6:58:02 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Tanks are not very amphibious especially upgraded variants that we didn’t even have, MP battalions only went away not all of the PMO MOS’s, and scout platoons are still a battalion asset. I think you need to read more into what a MAGTF provides and the transitioning mission of the USMC. The commandant’s plans coincide with this shift. Changes suck but it’s not a bad thing to have leadership focusing on the next fight instead of the previous. In my nobody small fry golfing opinion the problem with the USMC is their 2030+ timeline goals and capacity - 170,000 active end strength https://www.ar15.com/forums/general/USMC-plans-for-fighting-a-war-with-China-off-to-a-rocky-start-/5-2598090/&page=2 |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
