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

To: adamyoshida; Cacique; Black Agnes
Interesting.
I like the general idea, but believe that the plans are far to grandious. It is unlikely that we would consistantly spend more than 5% of GDP on the military during peacetime.
This does not mean that we cannot increase spending now. 11 divisions is not enough. I would love to see an additional 6 expiditionary brigades on the strikecom model. Of these, three would be Marine and 3 re-enforced airborne. This would entail a large build up of our lift and support capabilities.
We may also need not 12, but 15 carrier groups.
For the foreseable future, we need one in the Western Pacific around North Korea, 2 in the Indian Ocean, 1 in the Persian Gulf, and one to cover the Mediterranian. I don't see how we can do this with our current 12 carriers. in the short term, we can make due by keeping the Constallation, Kityhawk, and JFK in service as the Ronald Reagan is worked up.
Our surface and support fleets will have to grow.
In 2000 we had only 116 surface force combattants (not including carriers). Assuming that each carrier group needs 3 cruisers, 4 destroyers, 2 subs, and 2 support ships, we have some building to do. (33+carriers) Likewise, we would need escorts for the new additional prepositioning and Marine Expiditionary brigades. The MEU's would require a Wasp-class (I suppose Tarawa would be fine in the meantime) ship plus a LPD, LSD, Cargo ship, some supply ships, and a 5 escort ships. That's another 33 ships.
The problem is that our current procurement rate cannot even maintain our current 316 ship force. Frankly, we need a 400 ship navy.
There are things we could do to hasten a build-up. We could upgrade and refit many of our reserve ships. We could also take a look at our surface combat program. For some reason, we are basing our future frigates and destroyers on the DD-21, of which we plan to build but 32. Given the high cost of each unit, a lower-cost replacement for our Perry Class frigates is in order. Great Britain is doing some interesting work in replacing its older frigates. A 4500 ton stealthy trimarine with a Spy-1F light Aegis system, and a helicopter would do nicely.
Unfortunately, due to CLinton-era decisions and a coaltion of liberal Democrats and fiscally-restrained Republicans, we aren't building enough ships to mayintain our 316 ship structure.
6 posted on 07/12/2003 12:41:39 AM PDT by rmlew ("Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: rmlew
It is unlikely that we would consistantly spend more than 5% of GDP on the military during peacetime.

Is that what this is?


11 posted on 07/12/2003 6:43:30 AM PDT by Jim Noble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: rmlew
Defense spending topped 5% during the Cold War in 'peacetime.'

The DD-21 has been cancelled- it's replacement in named the DD(X).

New, light, Frigates are on the way. But what the Navy really needs are more Carriers- which, after all, won't require as many escorts as they did a decade and a half ago.

Another Airborne Division, I think, is key. Plus additional large bombers (B-2's or a new design).

Frankly, the only Naval power of real use in the near term is that capable of projecting power onto land. The US Army could not defeat all of the other armies in the world- the Air Force might be able to defeat every other Air Froce in the world combined- maybe. But the US Navy is so overwhelmingly superior in terms of sea combat that it seems probable that it could defeat every other navy in the entire world several times over.
15 posted on 07/12/2003 4:24:31 PM PDT by adamyoshida
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | 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