Quote:
Originally Posted by likwid
No, Mitt is not even remotely close to right on the Navy.
Also maybe we all missed out on the whole thing through the 80's and 90's about streamlining the military in general, less vehicles, less ships, less money being blown on old infrastructure that was obsolete and worthless when we have lots of really really cool crap for multirole purposes?
|
Err, no. We did streamline the military in the 90s, perhaps too much. But we did not streamline requirements and
missions.
And at what point do we go from streamlining to gutting?
The 2000s were horrible for the Navy ship counts and this is only accelerating now (though to the O admin's credit somewhat stabilized for now though the can is still getting kicked).
The Navy is by hull count the smallest it has been in nearly 100 years. But the missions have not. Ships spend far more time deployed at sea, with smaller overworked crews (and less people to do the simple stuff), with bigger repair needs, than at any time since WWII.
That would indicate that there are not enough hulls to do the missions.
Threaded Mode