Skip to comments.Gates To Navy: Anchors Away
Posted on 05/07/2010 5:30:56 PM PDT by Kaslin
Military Advantage: Our defense secretary proposes doing what no other foreign adversary has done: sink the U.S. Navy. We don't need those billion-dollar destroyers, he says. Meanwhile, the Chinese navy rushes to fill the vacuum.
Once Britannia ruled the waves, later to be replaced by America and its Navy. From the Battle of Midway to President Reagan's 600-ship fleet that helped win the Cold War, naval supremacy has been critical to the protection and survival of our nation.
Which is why we find the recent remarks of Defense Secretary Robert Gates to the Navy League at the Sea-Air-Space expo so disturbing. He seems to think naval supremacy is a luxury we can't afford and that, like every other aspect of our military, an already shrunken U.S. Navy needs to downsize.
"As we learned last year, you don't necessarily need a billion-dollar guided missile destroyer to chase down and deal with a bunch of teenage pirates wielding AK-47s and RPGs (rocket-propelled grenades)," Gates quipped.
We are not laughing.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
Gates and all the current idiots in the Obama administration are clueless intellectual dreamers with no anchors anywhere in reality.
He has 'em, they are "nerfbles" guaranteed not to damage or harm.
1. Faisal Shahzad spent a night in the Lincoln Bedroom.
2. Pres_ _ent Obama will each day decrease US security as he (directly or indirectly) releases or defends another terrorist.
3. Pres_ _ent Obamal will willingly release his birth certificate.
Gates works for Obama now. He is a stooge.
If Obama says crap. Gates says where and how high.
Sad, but true
Gates is the consummate bureaucrat waiting for orders. He’d blow up the Washington Monument and Lincoln Memorial, and burn the original copy of the constitution if either a Dim or Republican president told him to.
Or "What color?"
Sounds like Gates has the common sense of a block of cheese.
There is some reality here. To start with, US Navy ship procurement has turned into chaos. There are far too many individuals with a say in ship design, and there is no design stability, which drives the cost of ships through the roof.
Imagine how expensive a car would be if at intervals during its assembly, a half dozen major changes were made to its engines, power train, body, electrical system, interior design, and even wheels. You would end up with a million dollar Frankenstein monster that was a technical mess.
There has to be design and budget finalization. This means that any new changes or modifications must be made to the next ship design, as the current ship design and budget are frozen, and must be built to existing specifications and the budgeted cost. And *then* to start to actually build the ship.
This being said, to put it bluntly, the US Navy needs more expendable ships. As Gates pointed out, sending billion dollar ships to police up some pirates is not cost effective. By using “cheap ships” to do that work, that are low cost to build, low cost to maintain, and low cost to use, the good ships are kept in reserve.
An excellent comparison is the Air Force’s B-52 bombers. Cheap, easy to maintain, reliable. Even though we have advanced bombers, the B-52s still do most of the work, because we just don’t need all the expensive high tech bombers, with expensive maintenance, and expensive use, to do ordinary and boring jobs. We should keep them in reserve for when they are needed, and save a fortune.
Now here’s the real zinger. Our potential enemies #1 enemy is the US Navy. And naval strategy tells us that the first engagement with your enemy will often determine the outcome of the war. But if our peacetime front line are “cheap ships”, it is a problem for the enemy.
If they hit our “cheap ships”, it would be as if the Japanese had hit a different Hawaiian port, and blown up a bunch of tugboats. They would have wasted their attack, and the US Navy would have really nailed them.
With most of our “high quality” navy in Reserve, to attack our “cheap ships” would be insane. And yet such ships would be just fine for doing the ordinary, boring jobs, like policing pirates.
Gates is a whore. God bless our military-what will be left of it when this commie bastard leaves office.
THe Chinese are building up their navy and the Russians are modernizing and expanding theirs. The Russians have 3 carriers on the way, and the Chinese at least that many.
You have to remember that Gates probably has stopped even worse from coming from Obama-EG complete scrapping of our nuclear arsenal, and to the heart defense cuts. (Sad to say that, but it probably is true). He is better than Wes Clark (The one 0 originally wanted as SECDEF)
For a different perspective, current CNO and the Director Naval Warfare Integration Group both praise the new QDR and its role for the Naval Service in the pages of this month’s Proceedings.
Why not just take some of the ships we have in mothballs and put them out to sea? You don’t need an Aegis class cruiser to take out a Somali pirate.
I think they mean, Anchors Aweigh.
Actually Admiral Hyman Rickover, “The father of the nuclear navy” said basically the same things that Gates is saying. I don’t agree but I’m simply stating that this is neither a new point of view nor necessarily one geared toward weakening the United States.
Charleston County GOP Censures Sen. Lindsey Graham Senator Eyeing Sec Def Appointment?
Written by Bob Dill
Wednesday, 18 November 2009
Gates is a disgrace. He is willing to pander to this administration in exchange for his career. In my opinion these people are worst than people like Boxer or Frank.
and your point is?
IMO that’s not the problem. I think Gates is all for Gates, and to Hell with anything else. He has his marching orders from the WH, and he is marching as instructed.
The Left has always wanted to destroy our military superiority. They’ve tried everytime they’ve been in power.
Think about this
Just how may US flagged cargo ships are left? Not many.
The U.S. Navy is the largest in the world; its battle fleet tonnage is greater than that of the next 13 largest navies combined. The U.S. Navy also has the world’s largest carrier fleet, with 11 in service and one under construction. The USMC, measured by itself, would be the 4th largest Navy on the planet.
Something has to give, we are trillions in the hole and still digging.....
He seems to think naval supremacy is a luxury we can't afford and that, like every other aspect of our military, an already shrunken U.S. Navy needs to downsize.I expect that the US Navy will be heavily involved in the war against Iran and its proxies in the oil shipping routes, and of course will be relied upon for air strikes against targets in Africa, Iran, and elsewhere. Thanks Kaslin.
Damn straight, and if he tries mothballing those carriers, he’s going to have the American public looking for a short rope and a tall branch.
No they are on the Saudis and Chinese payroll.
Most mothball ships are no longer adequate. Probably the last that will ever be revived were the Iowa-class battleships during the Reagan years. Getting them active was very difficult, as many essential parts were no longer manufactured. Otherwise, most are scheduled to be scrapped.
It would be far cheaper to build new, destroyer sized ships. Unlike our current destroyers, that are of the size of cruisers, these would be the size of traditional destroyers, and a group of them would likely have a destroyer tender ship, to extend their mission range.
He is a member of all three one world order social clubs: Bilderberg, CFR and TriLat.
Zumwalt class destroyers.
"As we learned last year, you don't necessarily need expensive aircraft to chase down and deal with a bunch of Pacho Villa's teenage Mexican bandits wielding Winchesters," ...... Secretary of War, February, 1917
Name one, single American-made aircraft that saw combat in World War One in 1917 and 1918.
The U.S. was so unprepared for a "real war" that American pilots had to fly the left-overs that the French and the British allowed them to have. (Nieuports had a nasty habit of shedding wings during combat, so, the French gave them to the Americans so that French pilots could have first dibs on the sturdier SPADS).
In the next major naval war, possibly with China, we won't have the luxury of being unprepared.
That is not what those ships are built for. When the balloon goes up, those billion dollar ships are the ones that will be protecting our CVN's from air power and submarine threats.
In the 1940's, when the Japanese caught America flat-footed in both Pearl Harbor and the Phillipines, the 1940's style of war allowed America the luxury to spend years building up its might from nearly scratch.
In the 21st Century style of warfare, you have no such luxury. The entire war may be decided in a couple of hours in the first major engagement.
With most of our high quality navy in Reserve, to attack our cheap ships would be insane. And yet such ships would be just fine for doing the ordinary, boring jobs, like policing pirates.
The only thing that you need to "police pirates" is the political will that the Russians showed last week. Right now, somewhere off the coast of Somalia, an inflatable boatful boatful of pirates is slowly dying of thirst, cast adrift by the Russian Navy.
Once you have the political guts to kill them, dealing with pirates requires nothing more high tech than tramp steamers fitted out as Q-Ships.
No, we need 13 to 15, of which, to be blunt about it, three or four would be reserves against losses in any confrontation with anyone whose asses we'll have to kick so hard their hemorrhoids will get stuck to their tonsils.
The stink of rationalization is all over this "review" Gates is talking about.
We have plenty of "cheap ships" if he needs them: They're laid up in Bremerton and Suisun Bay and the James River.
If the politicians can stop expending them as targets.
They’ve had three carriers on the way for thirty years. They have hardly any support ships, no supply ships and no experience.
Was the Stark or the Cole prepared? Was the Army prepared for after the fall of Baghdad? We we prepared at the start of the Korean war? How about GI wearing starched uniforms and white undershirts at the start of Vietnam? We we prepared to meet Rommel in North Africa?
When were we ever prepared for the war that came?
Sounds right. He's fully multi-but-not-your-culti: At Texas A&M University, he showed some cadet the Full Frown of Majesty for having a 1" x 1" Confederate-flag sticker on his footlocker. Either that sticker goes, or you go!
Way to man up, Gates!
Well, Obama has said he's all for gays in the military.
I thought we had a buttload of '70's and '80's-production Spruance and Perry types laid up. Not to mention a bunch of '70's-era 1052-class (Knox class) FFG's, which were the immediate predecessors of the Perry class.
Plus all the big DLG's re-rated CLG from the 60's and 70's -- the Belknaps and Dahlgrens and Harry Yarnalls; what happened to them?
The NWO needs to limit the Navy. (and the military in general)
Haven’t folks figured out why Gates was kept on.......?
Gates is just another RAT whore...no different than Pelosi,Sphincter,”Reverend” Wright or Bill Ayers.Gates’ current appointment is Hussein’s way of telling our enemies “you need not fear us”.
>>If Obama says crap. Gates says where and how high.
Two Leftists and a cup??
Interesting. I wonder how Graham will ‘evolve’ his position on introducing homosexuals into the military.
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.