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

To: furquhart
There's a real need for surface ships...Build more frigates, and give the DDG-51's an upgrade and keep them rolling off the assembly line for another decade or so. Bring the total up to a good 120ish.

I agree. The Navy needs to be balanced. The Navy needs a lot more ships in my opinion. Ever since the Navy fell to less than 400 ships we've put ourselves in a very dangerous position.

I don't agree with the numbers of surface ships built, however. I think the biggest worry that we should have in ship level right now it the number of fast attack nuclear submarines. It is ridiculously low. And it is only going to get smaller since we are only building about 1 Virginia class submarine per year. Clinton (and Bush 41) really hurt our Navy ship levels. It amazes and disturbs me how many submarines were decommissioned in the 90s! Add in the fact that we had several major submarine espionage cases in the Clinton administration, and you will come to the conclusion that our submarine force is not nearly as powerful and intimidating as it was in the 70s or 80s.

So I think for every advanced frigate or destroyer, we should build 2 nuclear submarines. We don't need to go to Cold War levels, but we certainly need to go away from "Hit me, I'm not paying attention" levels.

18 posted on 05/15/2006 1:37:35 AM PDT by burzum (A single reprimand does more for a man of intelligence than a hundred lashes for a fool.--Prov 17:10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: burzum

But Clinton didn't manage to give away quite all our military tech secrets. That's why we need to elect Hillery. To complete the tech transfer.


21 posted on 05/15/2006 1:56:36 AM PDT by OldArmy52 (China & India: Doing jobs Americans don't want to do (manuf., engineering, accounting, etc))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: burzum
So I think for every advanced frigate or destroyer, we should build 2 nuclear submarines. We don't need to go to Cold War levels, but we certainly need to go away from "Hit me, I'm not paying attention" levels.

I believe the total number of submarines, the 90s build-down and burn one to build one is mandated by Soviet-era arms agreements.
24 posted on 05/15/2006 2:13:11 AM PDT by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (Give Them Liberty Or Give Them Death! - IT'S ISLAM, STUPID! - Islam Delenda Est! - Rumble thee forth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: burzum
It amazes and disturbs me how many submarines were decommissioned in the 90s!

One thing I approve of, though, is the way the Navy has converted some of the older boomers into cruise missile carriers. 3 or 4 cruise missiles in each missile tube makes for a lot of warheads on one ship!

40 posted on 05/15/2006 6:16:11 AM PDT by jimtorr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

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