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

Skip to comments.

USS George Washington gaining attention as possible budget casualty
Stars and Stripes ^ | 7 Oct 11 | Leo Shane III

Posted on 10/08/2011 3:10:17 PM PDT by GATOR NAVY

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101 next last
To: BIGLOOK

Most of every tax dollar is wasted. Defense is the one area where we get anything of real value: (not enough) pay for patriots and some cool toys for them to defend our nation with.


41 posted on 10/08/2011 7:20:08 PM PDT by magslinger (To properly protect your family you need a Bible, a twelve gauge and a pig.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: BIGLOOK

“..........like a proposal to sell a 25 year old Nimitz class to the highest bidder in the future (and all know who that would be).”

Lights are on BIGLOOK, and somebody is home. Precisely what the Lefties would do given half a chance.

Good thinkin’.


42 posted on 10/08/2011 7:36:04 PM PDT by rockinqsranch (Dems, Libs, Socialists, call 'em what you will, they ALL have fairies livin' in their trees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Army Air Corps; Dr. Scarpetta
Egad! Our government pissed away $1.2 trillion and we have squat to show for it.

NOT SO! We have these ...


43 posted on 10/08/2011 8:10:57 PM PDT by NonValueAdded (So much stress was put on Bush's Fault that it finally let go, magnitude 6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: NonValueAdded

Gee, I feel sooooo much better now.


44 posted on 10/08/2011 8:13:38 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: GATOR NAVY

It would than this as it make far more sense to early decom CVN-65 as at the end of it’s service life. Decomming a mid life carrier does not make sense unless the hull had major damage.. This is CV-66 AMERICA all over again. Decommed at mid life for absolutely no good reason.


45 posted on 10/08/2011 8:53:52 PM PDT by cva66snipe (Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
Without a forward deployed carrier group in Japan, and the carrier that back it up, the WESTPAC in its entirety would be at much greater risk, particularly as Red China continues to Rise.

I agree, and that's why I thought the lack of mention as to a replacement was troubling. You can bet your bottom dollar the Chicoms would cook up all sorts of mischief to take advantage of that.

46 posted on 10/08/2011 9:21:12 PM PDT by GATOR NAVY ("The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen." -Dennis Prager)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: A.A. Cunningham

To fund “special education”, something the feds shouldn’t even be involved in. Crazy,


47 posted on 10/08/2011 9:24:06 PM PDT by GATOR NAVY ("The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen." -Dennis Prager)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: cva66snipe
It would than this as it make far more sense to early decom CVN-65 as at the end of it’s service life. Decomming a mid life carrier does not make sense unless the hull had major damage.

Unless you have a secondary purpose of getting rid of the forward-deployed carrier. Enterprise will be gone in a few years anyway when the Ford is commissioned. That's an even trade. The want to actually reduce the number of CVNs in commission.

48 posted on 10/08/2011 9:35:44 PM PDT by GATOR NAVY ("The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen." -Dennis Prager)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: GATOR NAVY
Yea I know the savings would simply be operational. Makes even less sense to keep building FORD and decomming Washington. I have think that in the post-Reagan years both parties share a common {bipartisan} goal to destroy our military.
49 posted on 10/08/2011 9:44:31 PM PDT by cva66snipe (Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Cicero; Pan_Yan

I’m harboring serious doubts that it would save anything at all. They didn’t decommission the Enterprise because it would’ve COST more than the purchase price of the ship. That was 1991, things haven’t gotten cheaper since then.


50 posted on 10/08/2011 9:47:15 PM PDT by Excuse_My_Bellicosity (Liberalism is a social disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rockinqsranch; BIGLOOK
“..........like a proposal to sell a 25 year old Nimitz class to the highest bidder in the future (and all know who that would be).”

NEVER happen...it is ILLEGAL to sell US Navy nuclear powered vessels of any kind to ANY foreign entity.

Unless the law is changed, the only possibility after decom is to scrap the ship. All US Navy nuclear powered vessels will ultimately meet this fate. I think the Nautilus is the only exemption, and it's permanently mounted at a pier in Connecticut.
51 posted on 10/08/2011 9:56:03 PM PDT by rottndog (Be Prepared for what's coming AFTER America....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis

I’m not going to praise this, but raise this observation: an aircraft carrier is a big target at sea.

Maybe in this age of satellites and cruise missiles, we should be revamping our naval order of battle.

We need to conceptualize what the next world war will look like. Do we need aircraft carriers? Perhaps we need more nuclear submarines with quieter propulsion systems? Perhaps a revolutionary vessel which can travel both on the surface and submerged?

I’m only throwing ideas out there; not necessarily agreeing with scrapping a carrier which could have another 25 good years of useful life ahead in our navy.

Note: I’m a Navy vet.


52 posted on 10/08/2011 9:57:34 PM PDT by SatinDoll (NO FOREIGN NATIONALS AS OUR PRESIDENT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: SatinDoll

I think you’re quite right.


53 posted on 10/08/2011 10:02:35 PM PDT by rottndog (Be Prepared for what's coming AFTER America....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: rottndog

Thanks. Any ideas you’d like to toss out there?

Now’s the time to get wild and crazy!


54 posted on 10/08/2011 10:06:26 PM PDT by SatinDoll (NO FOREIGN NATIONALS AS OUR PRESIDENT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: GATOR NAVY; Pan_Yan

Talk is talk. This is the kind of crap that Jimmy Carter did when he was president. He vetoed the entire military budget submission because he insisted that the Carl Vinson (CVN-70) not be built. Govt. libs talk dollar savings and deficit reduction when it’s actually just another way to stick it to the military.

The saving of $7 billion while spending a trillion his first month in office is just another example of what a joke Hussein is, and why this clown is a one-termer. This moron will be out of office before this garbage comes close to being a reality. And how much sense does it make to keep ancient ships that have become a maintenance nightmare while shelving a ship that was commissioned less than 20 years ago (the 25 years mentioned in the article must be from when the keel was first laid)? This is complete idiocy.


55 posted on 10/08/2011 10:09:53 PM PDT by Excuse_My_Bellicosity (Liberalism is a social disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SatinDoll

Actually...I just had a wild idea....

And I was a submariner....

Submarine vertically launched fighter drones....

(should I really have said that publicly?????)


56 posted on 10/08/2011 10:10:57 PM PDT by rottndog (Be Prepared for what's coming AFTER America....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: rottndog

Good idea! Sounds doable, too.

The neat thing about drones is they’re dispensable. You won’t be having them return. So, the inexpensive parts can be kept aboard, drones assembled as needed then launched. Who needs a carrier!


57 posted on 10/08/2011 10:16:07 PM PDT by SatinDoll (NO FOREIGN NATIONALS AS OUR PRESIDENT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: SatinDoll

Submarine could launch them, and once they become ‘active’ they could revert to remote control through satellite communication.

But I’m pretty sure they would have to be pre-assembled and loaded ready to go on the boat pierside.


58 posted on 10/08/2011 10:20:27 PM PDT by rottndog (Be Prepared for what's coming AFTER America....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: rottndog

Totally pre-assembled would take up too much room. It wouldn’t be feasible to have something with wings sticking out on board a sub. Retracted wings that pop-out upon launch...now that would work. It won’t need landing gear because it isn’t going to land anywhere.


59 posted on 10/08/2011 10:29:22 PM PDT by SatinDoll (NO FOREIGN NATIONALS AS OUR PRESIDENT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: SatinDoll
Dang...somebody already had the idea...
60 posted on 10/08/2011 10:49:00 PM PDT by rottndog (Be Prepared for what's coming AFTER America....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101 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