Son of a bitch!
That was my response after reading an article by Bryan McGrath. You can read it here but this is my take away....
1. Consensus is being achieved and the only winners are those pussies in the Air Force. An Air Force I will happily remind you that doesn't do joint unless they're in charge and an Air Force that has sold its soul to stealth with the very idea of bankrupting the other services. Those sorry bastards have succeeded.
2. We're going down to probably 8 carriers. Now its becoming even more clear why the Navy wants out of the F-35 program. They get VERY little and lose alot for a capability that isn't worth the effort. I curse the Marine Corps for getting involved in this program and I curse past leadership for letting this boondoggle go on this long.
3. We are heading toward a force that will barely be able to defend current commitments, much less surprises that are sure to come down the pike. You happy about gays in the military? You pleased about females in combat? Enjoy because while the idiots in the Pentagon focused on that they've eviscerated our military forces.
4. Abe and the Japanese are smart. Real smart. They can see whats going on and are devising a scheme to stand up to China without US assistance. When will S. Korea, the Philippines and others realize that the once formidable US, will in the span of a couple of years, have the strength of an aids patient?
5. We're screwed without new leadership in the White House and Pentagon. It will not be enough to get rid of Obama and his pacifist ilk. We need to give the Pentagon a good enema. Too many shit bird officers have risen in rank under this administration.
We're looking at a rough period internationally. Everyone turns to the US for leadership. When it becomes obvious to all that we're not providing it then I expect wars to break out in formerly peaceful regions. A shit storm is coming thanks to the idiots in the Pentagon, Congress and White House.
That was my response after reading an article by Bryan McGrath. You can read it here but this is my take away....
1. Consensus is being achieved and the only winners are those pussies in the Air Force. An Air Force I will happily remind you that doesn't do joint unless they're in charge and an Air Force that has sold its soul to stealth with the very idea of bankrupting the other services. Those sorry bastards have succeeded.
2. We're going down to probably 8 carriers. Now its becoming even more clear why the Navy wants out of the F-35 program. They get VERY little and lose alot for a capability that isn't worth the effort. I curse the Marine Corps for getting involved in this program and I curse past leadership for letting this boondoggle go on this long.
3. We are heading toward a force that will barely be able to defend current commitments, much less surprises that are sure to come down the pike. You happy about gays in the military? You pleased about females in combat? Enjoy because while the idiots in the Pentagon focused on that they've eviscerated our military forces.
4. Abe and the Japanese are smart. Real smart. They can see whats going on and are devising a scheme to stand up to China without US assistance. When will S. Korea, the Philippines and others realize that the once formidable US, will in the span of a couple of years, have the strength of an aids patient?
5. We're screwed without new leadership in the White House and Pentagon. It will not be enough to get rid of Obama and his pacifist ilk. We need to give the Pentagon a good enema. Too many shit bird officers have risen in rank under this administration.
We're looking at a rough period internationally. Everyone turns to the US for leadership. When it becomes obvious to all that we're not providing it then I expect wars to break out in formerly peaceful regions. A shit storm is coming thanks to the idiots in the Pentagon, Congress and White House.
Faced with a declining budget and rapidly increasing personnel costs, who's going to explain why a half-million (wo)man army is required? And why only cut the army ten or fifteen percent?
ReplyDeleteI understand that it's quicker and easier to cut acquisition, and so that's being done (although not to JSF, as it should), but if there's no need for a huge army (and there isn't) then the US should bite the bullet and get on with it.
The case against a large army can't be equally made about the other services, and that's a fact. The case for requiring Navy, Marines and Air Force can't be made for Army, that's also a fact. And saying we've needed an army in the past and so we need one now is insufficient, when one looks at how that army has been used (or misused) in the last fifty years.
good article. i was going to link it but a quick swing around the web showed you got more than enough air time without me chiming in.
Deleteas far as the Army is concerned, what bothers me is that we're no longer dealing with a conscription force. when we go small Army thats the Army we're going to have to deal with whatever comes up. and when it comes to land war, if an issue arises its going to require bodies....trained bodies in a hurry.
the USAF brings little to the table but old thinking in a new stealth wrapper. they tossed aside supression of air defenses, they've been slow to embrace lasers and they're not doing their part in leading the way on air defense in any form. its been a Navy show for the most part.
the USAF is a leech and they're sucking everyone dry to buy bombers they don't use and then name like warships because they cost so much that we're going to shrink our navy to pay for it.
I would have more sympathy for the Army if they would dump the M-1, Bradley and Stryker. 3 vehicles that bring little or no value but consume lots of logistics. The Tribble syndrome.
ReplyDeleteso you want the Army to cut it's only wheeled APC, it's only IFV, and it's only tank.....?
DeleteAnd replace them with what, more M113s and M60s pulled out of National Guard depots?
http://cdrsalamander.blogspot.com/2011/12/navy-of-2025-contrarian-view.html
ReplyDeleteJust an FYI...
Just a small observation.
ReplyDeleteSeems that the US Navy is after the Aussie Collins class replacement project to equip the RAN with nuclear subs. This is going to upset the Japanese, which has been trying to win the Collins class replacement sub contract for several years.
However, the sales of nuclear subs to Australia would also open ways for Japan and Korea to convert their large ocean going subs to nuclear power(They aren't going to buy US nuclear subs, but build their own). The issue has been the fuel, which must be enriched to 90%.
After reading that article I'm starting to wonder if the USN will get involved in the foreign land based business with their Super Hornets and Growlers. Think about this: the USAF is trying to kill the A-10 and even the F-15C for more funds to feed to the F-35A. They have only promised to upgrade 300 F-16s from their old and worn Viper fleet. They also have about 220 F-15E Strike Eagles and 187 F-22 Raptors that they are afraid of getting so much as a scratch on. The USMC has all but abandoned their Legacy F/A-18s for the F-35B. They have promised to keep the Harrier alive until 2030, but the Harrier will be pitifully insufficient well before then. Combining these numbers, that's not very many tactical aircraft for global operations.
ReplyDeleteThe total orders for the USN currently stand at 563 Super Hornets plus 135 Growlers (698 air frames total). Since the USN is now facing the loss of a carrier, assuming that happens, it will have a surplus of aircraft and could thus take up the USAF and USMC slack for foreign land based combat ready tactical aircraft. There's a joke about irony in here somewhere I just can't think of it.
The rumor points the cancellation of proposed F-16 upgrade in the upcoming FY15 budget request. USAF plans to gut A-10 MC-12W KC-10 fleets altogether, greatly reducing personnel strength and other assets such as UAV and R&D investments. But they draw the line to protect their top 3 programs: F-35, KC-46, and next gen bomber. They are untouchable until otherwise.
DeleteAs for the navy, I doubt there will be surplus of tac fighters even if one or two carriers being removed from the fleet. Navy may well give up on the F-35 before UCAV comes to fruition. There won't be enough SHornets to fill the gap. The official program of record for DoN's JSF stands at 640 aircrafts.
The Navy has no choice right now. They've already given up, but they just can't walk away. The UCLASS drone is constantly being pushed back because it's a threat to the F-35.
DeleteIf the Navy got two carriers cut they would in fact have some Super Hornets not scheduled for anything for a while. I don't know how many, and that could strongly vary depending on how many Legacy Hornets will be decommissioned by then, but they could send them to bases in places like South East Asia.
The Japanese won't even able to export tanks, what makes you think they can sell subs to a foreign customer? The Aussie is most likely to stay with a conventional design, which means you can bet multiple vendors from Europe will be lining up for the competition. Will Jap be upset with them too? Nuke sub is only good for long distance/large area coverage, which fits USN perfectly. It's not ideal for countries like SK or Japan. Their main concerns are toward each other and their neighbors. Their subs won't have to travel and patrol thousands of miles away from home port.
ReplyDeleteadaptus primus
DeleteAbe administration already changed the rules so that Japan could export weapons to NATO member states + 3 NATO partner nations(Australia, Korea, and New Zealand). And yes, both Korea and Japan want nuclear subs, but securing 90% enriched fuel used in military grade reactors was the biggest obstacle. Use of civilian grade fuels would mean fuel had to be replaced every 2~5 years, which is not realistic because military grade reactors are completely sealed.
www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/japan-asked-to-share-submarine-technology/
Japan asked to share submarine technology
AUSTRALIA has asked Japan to consider providing highly advanced propulsion technology to be used in the navy's planned 12 new submarines.
Defence Minister David Johnston has told The Weekend Australian Japanese officials had visited submarine maintenance facilities in Adelaide and talks were continuing.
In a speech to the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, Senator Johnston spoke about the Abbott government's wish to cement closer defence ties with Japan, including much closer defence-industry ties.
Senator Johnston said later he was particularly interested in the use of Japan's extremely effective submarine technology in Australia's future submarine, which is most likely to be an evolution of Australia's existing Collins-class vessels.