Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The American retreat on the seas
Washington Times ^ | Tuesday, June 4, 2013 | Christopher M. Lehman

Posted on 06/08/2013 4:34:43 AM PDT by Olog-hai

The United States is at a crossroads, and the American people must consider carefully an issue that has been creeping up on us for two decades. For most of the past 70 years, America enjoyed unquestioned naval global superiority, and we could be confident that the U.S. Navy could establish and sustain maritime dominance wherever and whenever needed.

However, since the early 1990s, America’s Navy has been in decline with our fleet shrinking from almost 600 ships to just 283 ships by the end of 2012. Now in 2013, President Obama has announced a new defense strategy for America that threatens to accelerate the continued decline of U.S. naval power, particularly relative to a burgeoning Chinese fleet.

In the years after World War II, Great Britain’s military declined to a point where the British Army and the Royal Navy were (and remain) a shadow of what they used to be. Great Britain’s power and influence around the world waned in parallel, and the once-feared Royal Navy atrophied into what can perhaps best be described as a coastal defense force.

Is the United States headed down the same path today? Like Great Britain, America is under tremendous fiscal pressure and, as in Great Britain, powerful voices are pushing for drastic cuts in defense spending—some in order to avoid drastic reductions in social spending and others in order to stem further expansion of our national debt. …

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: navaldominance; paxamericana; redchina; usnavy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-55 next last
To: rarestia; All

Well I hate to break to you, some of our founder didn’t mind having a standing army or navy like Adams, Jefferson, and Madison..


21 posted on 06/08/2013 5:37:47 AM PDT by KevinDavis (The Bill of Rights is a suicide pact.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

The commander in chief is promoting Islam. His navy backs him up. They would defend a Muslim nation from Israel.


22 posted on 06/08/2013 5:39:36 AM PDT by Vaquero (Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: rarestia

States need to have a military budget. Each state should have as many well trained and armed infantry regiments as possible. These soldiers should be under the authority of the Governor. A regiment (1000) per 500,000 population.


23 posted on 06/08/2013 5:39:43 AM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis

And look where it’s taken us.

Fighting a war like WWI or WWII should require a large army of volunteers. Korea, Vietnam, even the middle east conflicts and Afghanistan should not have been skirmishes to which we dedicated troops.


24 posted on 06/08/2013 5:43:26 AM PDT by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: rarestia
“A military should only exist in times of war”
You sir are an ignoramus.
25 posted on 06/08/2013 6:33:43 AM PDT by TheGunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: TheGunny
You sir are an ignoramus.

Care to expand on that, Gunny? I stand among the greatest of our Founders in the belief that a standing army is unnecessary during peacetime.

26 posted on 06/08/2013 6:55:17 AM PDT by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: TheGunny; rarestia
Standing Armies
27 posted on 06/08/2013 7:02:17 AM PDT by Vaquero (Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: RepRivFarm

Succinctly said.


28 posted on 06/08/2013 7:10:11 AM PDT by deadrock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RepRivFarm

Then may I ask, what should we do?
‘Nothing’ is NOT an alternative.


29 posted on 06/08/2013 7:12:55 AM PDT by jimjohn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

No God, no United States.


30 posted on 06/08/2013 7:16:49 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero

Thank you, Vaquero. This perfectly summarizes what I’ve read and understood of our Founders’ disdain for standing armies.

The modern army along with the overbearing and bulging Executive branch has the potential, if not already in motion, to collapse everything about America. For our sake, the military generally stands on the side of Liberty, but with the ranks filling with faggots and criminals, it might be only a matter of time before we experience first-hand what Madison warned us against.


31 posted on 06/08/2013 7:24:57 AM PDT by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero

Seems like the greater danger in that equation is the “overgrown Executive”.


32 posted on 06/08/2013 7:27:47 AM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: rarestia
A military should only exist in times of war.

Say, for the sake of argument, the U.S. had no standing army in 1941. What would have happened from December 8th onward?

33 posted on 06/08/2013 7:28:53 AM PDT by 0.E.O
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

The real question is with what side will our military ally itself as we reach a true police state. Never before in my lifetime have I seen such contempt held by service people for their flag officers who are consumed with politically correct nonsense as the military degenerates.


34 posted on 06/08/2013 7:46:40 AM PDT by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 0.E.O
That’s what happens when people don’t read Madison correctly and omit Washington's thoughts. The type of army that Madison spoke of (controlled by an overgrown and unwieldy executive with too much power) was the very thing we fought in the War of Independence.

One of Washington’s most famous quotes is this one:
If we desire to avoid insult, we must be able to repel it; if we desire to secure peace, one of the most powerful instruments of our rising prosperity, it must be known that we are at all times ready for War.
No nation can survive without a standing military. No nation can be on a defensive footing without such.

As for your thought experiment, Japan’s forces would merely have sailed into Hawaii and enslaved all of the civilians; there would have been no military targets to bother with nor any kind of significant or organized civilian resistance. Next stop for them would have been Los Angeles.
35 posted on 06/08/2013 7:47:41 AM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: pabianice

If they see their own family members being victimized by any members of the military, I do not see our military being too keen on supporting any demagogue in DC. The current incumbent remains hell-bent on disemboweling our national defense, so any real threat would then come from without.


36 posted on 06/08/2013 7:49:32 AM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Seems like the greater danger in that equation is the “overgrown Executive”.

its HIS NAVY.

you must get rid of the overgrown exec...he is Commander In Chief. until you do, it is the new Islamic/Marxist Navy. and I would not let any of my sons join up until it is the American Navy(any branch actually) again.


37 posted on 06/08/2013 7:52:38 AM PDT by Vaquero (Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero
The current CIC is engaging in shrinking “his navy” as you describe it. (Which it is not, incidentally.)
38 posted on 06/08/2013 7:56:07 AM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

So far on these threads, the libertarian idea of waiting until the troops are landing on our shores and parachuting inland, then we start preparing, is never brought up.


39 posted on 06/08/2013 1:02:58 PM PDT by ansel12 (Social liberalism/libertarianism, empowers, creates and imports, and breeds, economic liberals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero

“Or wait till 2016 and take the country back with votes(the most probable).”
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

I respectfully disagree, given the amount of vote fraud in the 2012 election and the fraud being uncovered in the 2008 election why would anyone imagine that the 2016 election will be any different than a standard banana republic dog and pony show? It ain’t who votes you know, it’s who counts the votes.


40 posted on 06/08/2013 1:34:25 PM PDT by RipSawyer (I was born on Earth, what planet is this?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-55 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson