Nobody is wargaming this because they have no intention of ever fighting China. If China invades Taiwan the US government will make a bunch of complaints in the UN and then do nothing. The same goes if they invade Vietnam or possibly even the Philippines and I am not entirely sure about Japan. If we actually fought China it would result in the US economy tanking due to how interdependent we are with China and alot of powerful and influential people losing alot of money invested in China. So I don't think anyone in Washington is seriously considering fighting China. They make a good excuse when arguing for budget for the latest pet project but nothing more than that.
The Big Brain National Security Expert concept in the 1990s was that economic engagement with China would make them more peaceful and democratic - they couldn't afford to go to war with us! Look how well that worked out. Rather than deterring China from aggression, economic engagement is deterring us from responding to Chinese aggression.
Thanks, Ivy League geniuses!
(And these are the people who whine that Trump appointees are "unqualified"...)
You rightly ask: Is anyone wargaming any of this? Answer: Yes. For the last several years. And results were generated, reviewed, re-evaluated, and...enshrined in warfighting concepts, with promises of JADC2, capabilities (not threat based) acquisition initiatives, ad infinitum. And it has succeeded beyond our wildest dreams, as the current state of world conflict is testament to! /sarcasm off
Didn't one of those guys say that the US has lots of 'war experience' after Afghanistan and Iraq and the Chinese don't? I didn't know that we fought naval battles with the Taliban.
Seriously? Trump isn’t president yet, you may have noticed. Try directing your ire at the administration purportedly currently in charge while California burns.
Pointing out most decent people kick someone in the nuts when they are already down. Especially when critical about subject matter they actually know nothing about.
Don’t forget Harris - one of her houses is currently evacuated down in SoCal due to the fires, yet she’s been mostly radio-silent since Congress ratified the election.
They are as real as a U.T.I. now, and I believe that the things they have set in motion by design or ineptitude will be as real as the outcome of digging the new well next to the privy. That's how they roll, Don.
Harris is this one, providing the benefit of her vast experience and expertise in finding ways to do nothing “patiently” in her helpful advice to the many thousands of Californians impacted by the wildfires:
"It's critically important that, to the extent you can find anything that gives you an ability to be patient in this extremely dangerous and unprecedented crisis, that you do."
And I just read that Harris has declined to do the usual tour of the VP quarters with the incoming VP, J.D. Vance. Several excuses, apparently, though one of them is her dealing with the CA fires. Huh?
For starters, Vallejo is a pit since base closure. A real estate wreck with low prices (CA relatively). Should be "cheap" to reset and reboot Naval base there. Maybe even tap into a few more of those excellent Cal Maritme grads down at the end of the street.
Vallejo was a pit when I went to OHP ERO school there in 1982. Maybe this fuel depot closure will allow Vallejo and Richmond (another pit) to siphon off their "excess" to the new community of West Martinez. A half dozen new industrial parks and trailer parks, a VoTech school on site...jobs, jobs, jobs. Where's the downside?
Thank you, Jet. My gut turned a little when I read USS William J. Clinton (CVN-82). But upon reflection, I am OK with it. D.E.I. We have a USNS Harvey Milk (T-AO-206). If we have a catcher, we need a pitcher. Though thinking of an UNREP disturbs me a bit.
Ye-ow. Larry Flynt was a Radarman? So was I, graduated RD"A" in July 1966 as an RDSA and was a 19 year old RD2 in November 1967, the LPO on my deploying DDG. Small world. Wish it was larger...because: Larry Flynt. USS Larry Flynt (DDG-141)?
Sure. What is good for the wuse is good for the slander.
Does ship naming come under the scope of duties of the SECNAV, SECDEF, or CINC?
If so, I hope that by first light on 31 Jan these names will be removed, and names of historical carriers replacing them. No more politician names for warships, unless they also had SIGNIFICANT military service.
Slick Willie "loathed the military" so having his name on a ship is a gigantic "FU" to all who served, or will serve.
As for George W. Bush, he at least served honorably, but as a zoomie, so perhaps naming a NEW AFB after him would be okay, but not any ship.
No quarrel with naming carriers after historically significant Presidents - two caveats: first and foremost the President must be dead; second the President must be historically significant for really good reasons... GW, Lincoln, TR, Truman, Reagan, all fit the bill. Arguments can be made for Kennedy and Bush Elder. None other since Reagan fit this requirement. Somehow back in the day, LBJ was nicely finessed out of a carrier by having a Zumwalt DDG named for him. Do the same for living Presidents... give'em a DDG or an LPD or a sub (Carter) or an auxiliary... Otherwise, use historically significant carrier names - Enterprise top of the list.
No ships or anything else should ever be named after politicians unless they have done something else outside their political life to warrant it. So Carter would be OK for a sub, and W for a ANG base, JFK gets a patrol craft and Bush 1 an attack aircraft. Truman gets an artiliary piece and TR a rifle. Washington was really a pre-politics figure so he is OK for anything. Ike would certainly fit the bill for significance outside his political career but wasn't associated with any particular weapon system. Perhaps a tank. The Interstate system is perhaps his best memorial. Ford is OK as he served on a carrier during WW2. Vinson, Stennis, Reagan, and Lincoln get nada.
If any of the following names is not currently in commission the name of the next carrier should be chosen from the following list: Lexington, Saratoga, Yorktown, Enterprise, Hornet, Wasp.
Currently, the only name in commission on that list is USS Wasp (LHD-1). Enterprise is assigned to a Ford under construction. All others are not in commission or assigned, most for a long time.
If that list is exausted, consider there are plenty more good ones before we name a carrier for a (still living!) political figure (especially one who not only never served in the military but actively avoided the draft), try: Midway, Coral Sea, Langley, Ranger, ... , oh and a personal favorite, Shangri-La.
While I'm on it,
Destoyers and frigates: distinguished past sailors or marines, or important historical ships of these classes, there is no USS Samuel B Roberts in commission, nor a Johnston, Heerman, or Hoel.
Submarines: finally we have partially at least gone back to fish, thank God. [edit, just checked and Wahoo or Tang won't be available for the next SSN class name as they are finally in commission again, as they should be]
A new Enterprise is under construction as a Ford class. I guess Ernest Evans (commander of the Johnston) has an upcoming DDG to be named after him. Approve your other suggestions as the action of Samar is perhaps the finest hour of the USN.
Gee, it’s almost like the folks in charge are working for the other side. If they were, in fact, working for the other side, what would they do any differently?
Didn’t Johnny Chung say the Clinton White House was like the subway? You have to put in coins to open the gates. So now Del Toro will name a CVN after Slick Willie.
Blame it on success of WW2 and over-success of military in the Cold War (that was against Russia, when China was a backward Third World zero power only one generation ago). And blame sucking up to the billionaire developers who profited from closures were all Republicans, the Tea Party was Republican, don't blame this on Democrats. If you want to be political then be pro-active with the Republicans we have now. No sailor or pilot or soldier cares which political party gets credit for filling his fuel tank.
This is what is called a personal goal / position description goal mismatch resulting in decisions that only make sense from the personal goal (advancement, personal wealth enrichment) perspective. There are possible other "whys" but exploring those might involve a federal grand jury...
corsair: I just found the website for One Treasure Island Affordable Housing. I love the computer-generated illustration of the future development that includes a marina filled with docked sailboats, presumably for homeless yacht owners.
Have been considering a 'Proceedings" article on our lack of prep in basics of warfighting. However, as I get spooled up to do so, I recall an artticle I wrote in 2007 on mental readiness after having a young Marine who was in my NROTC unit commit suicide. Proceedings board rejected the article as "unnecessary."
How many Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, Coast Guardsmen and Space Force plus Vets have we lost since then?
Anyhow, off the top of my head, what is the plan to defend Whidbey Island NAS, where nearly 100% of our airborne EW assets and repair facilities reside if not deployed? How about our Lock-Mart missile facilities in Arizona where most of our SAMS and air/surface missiles are produced? Why do we insist on pulling all of our big decks and many subs into port lined up in a row (aka Pearl Harbor) during Christmas and NY...how are those defended? (According to AirLant Ops when as a Carrier Ops O I asked that question in 2005, was told "because...just because."
Others probably have other areas we are deficit. For example, who in the Navy as the plan to recall to a/d those who have between 20 and 30 years and retired? What does activating our Reserves do to critical US infrastructure jobs? Inquiring minds want to know.
Over to the far right of your posted comment are three small dots. Click on those dots and a comment edit option will open up. Almost all of my comments are edited in some way within a few minutes after I post them in order to correct typos, to make small changes to the grammer or wording, or to correct links that don't work.
A group of PLAN/CCC wargamers are rolling in the aisles as we reduce the number of targets they need to plan for. I was always taught that when you realize you are in a hole, you should stop digging and start climbing. DC has never been more isolated from reality in my lifetime than it is today.
In 2006, I got tapped from the Senior Air War College class to play CC Korea and mentor a junior AWC class for their graduation exercise war game, a full out resumption of the Korean War. 36 seminars. Exactly 3 of us survived 48 hrs with assets in place, and all 3 of us concentrated on LOC's (dropping bridges and chokepoints) and supply depots rather than force on force. All 3 of us got wiped out day 3 when they brought the Chinese in. Oddly enough it was one Army, one Navy (me) and one USAF guy who held the line.
On the Reserve side, we'd be loosing some important people. I've got an sailor who works on electronics for recon aircraft as his civil job. I have to wonder if he's more valuable in that role than where I'd end up sticking him on mobilization. Or he'd be pulled over to a similar role and I'd end up with a gapped billet in the comms shop.
My point exactly. We should be looking in peace time who mobilizes where and their criticality to each side. We have thousands of airline pilots still in the reserves (two son-in-laws included), and folks like your Sailor. Waiting until a war breaks out and trying to add that to the pressures of a full mobilization is crazy. Likewise, who can we call in from the retired rolls to fulfill some non-frontt line rolls? Good to hear from you and thanks.
If we get in to a mother-loving Navy war, it may result in many old guys getting called back to the colors. How good is the recall for the Fleet Reserve and Retired Reserve.
I don’t know - imagine the duration of all training time required for remedial diversity training that will have to be completed and checkboxes checked before recalled OGs can be allowed back into the fleet. It might be faster to just breed new ones.
Yeah, I actually have a few started and thinking through their process I understand how the final product can end up being genuinely boring some months. They really need to balance their board out with some qualified outsiders. I would suggest a few regulars on Midrats and the usual circle.
Wow, Sid! Thank you for the b_tch slap back into reality. That's too many coffee gofers. Lord, I hope those folks spent most of their time on smartphones doing mindless "me" stuff. To think them involved in decision-making....I mean, plenty of young people are smart, but that doesn't always translate to good, sound decision-making. I have my own problem deciding the type and quantity of food I ingest. But they are a photogenic bunch. Duty is in the eye of the beholder. **sigh**
The raison d'etre for this facility, the nextdoor Martinez refinery, is closing. I'd suspect that the hardened fuel tanks are leaking. And Martinez has been a poster child for the environmental woes of "old California".
I drive past here weekly. Martinez, despite their history with the petroleum industry, is also highly prized for housing. The county is trying to encourage development of its historic downtown and the entire area south of hwy-4 has seen housing prices explode. Neighborhoods surrounding and above downtown are old and have the vibe from another era = hipster families and re-gentrifiers not interested in subdivision housing that is the rest of Contra Costa County.
"During the BRAC/Peace Dividend/Jesus Jones era during the Clinton Administration, the US military and especially the US Navy abandoned almost all of California except for a rump presence in San Diego with scatterings here and there. That includes a wholesale abandonment of what could be argued to be the most strategically located, most secure, almost bespoke geographically designed for a naval power—San Francisco Bay. Many more were closed outside BRAC for…reasons."
Agree, but it has been 25 years (a quarter century!) since the Clinton administration left office. The George W Bush, Obama, and Trump administrations all acknowledged that China was a growing national security problem. Yet nothing was done to preserve our West Coast naval infrastructure. Why has this been "too hard" for 25 years?
Remember in 2017 when the new Trump administration proclaimed "the Return of Great Power Competition"? That was eight years ago. What have we done since then to prepare the Air Force and Navy (the most relevant services) to deter/fight China or Russia? We keep talking about the problem but not actually doing much other than kicking the can down the road.
Yes there are various programs that will hopefully come to fruition over the next ten years. But China isn't going to sit still for the next ten years. The so-called pacing threat is outrunning us.
I think the USA defends Japan with the Phillipines a bit iffy. Taiwan will not be defended other than to supply arms. Trumps focus is on the American landmass north and south. I think it's inevitable that we end up as fortress America and no longer pax America.
Ass-U-Me. Close station. March order.
Nobody is wargaming this because they have no intention of ever fighting China. If China invades Taiwan the US government will make a bunch of complaints in the UN and then do nothing. The same goes if they invade Vietnam or possibly even the Philippines and I am not entirely sure about Japan. If we actually fought China it would result in the US economy tanking due to how interdependent we are with China and alot of powerful and influential people losing alot of money invested in China. So I don't think anyone in Washington is seriously considering fighting China. They make a good excuse when arguing for budget for the latest pet project but nothing more than that.
I fear you're right
The Big Brain National Security Expert concept in the 1990s was that economic engagement with China would make them more peaceful and democratic - they couldn't afford to go to war with us! Look how well that worked out. Rather than deterring China from aggression, economic engagement is deterring us from responding to Chinese aggression.
Thanks, Ivy League geniuses!
(And these are the people who whine that Trump appointees are "unqualified"...)
Brace yourself, Brian. You are going to get labeled a "Gloomy Gus". But you'll still be right.
You rightly ask: Is anyone wargaming any of this? Answer: Yes. For the last several years. And results were generated, reviewed, re-evaluated, and...enshrined in warfighting concepts, with promises of JADC2, capabilities (not threat based) acquisition initiatives, ad infinitum. And it has succeeded beyond our wildest dreams, as the current state of world conflict is testament to! /sarcasm off
What bothers me most are General Smith and Admiral Paparo telling us how easily we will be able to defeat China.
They are speaking loudly and carrying ever shrinking sticks.
Didn't one of those guys say that the US has lots of 'war experience' after Afghanistan and Iraq and the Chinese don't? I didn't know that we fought naval battles with the Taliban.
Depressing reading, especially under the curent circumstances: Trump fiddling with cheap talk while California blazes.
Seriously? Trump isn’t president yet, you may have noticed. Try directing your ire at the administration purportedly currently in charge while California burns.
A current president with one bright point that he stays bought. I'll bet the CCP wargamed this.
"An honest politician"!
Pointing out most decent people kick someone in the nuts when they are already down. Especially when critical about subject matter they actually know nothing about.
Yes, and he's trying to do as much harm as he possibly can without actually spilling gasolline in LA. Good luck for the next four years.
I would like to point out that this fire happened on the watch of Biden Newsom and Bass.
Don’t forget Harris - one of her houses is currently evacuated down in SoCal due to the fires, yet she’s been mostly radio-silent since Congress ratified the election.
Who are this 'Biden' and 'Harris'? They used to be in the news, but nary a word lately. Are they even real?
They are as real as a U.T.I. now, and I believe that the things they have set in motion by design or ineptitude will be as real as the outcome of digging the new well next to the privy. That's how they roll, Don.
Harris is this one, providing the benefit of her vast experience and expertise in finding ways to do nothing “patiently” in her helpful advice to the many thousands of Californians impacted by the wildfires:
"It's critically important that, to the extent you can find anything that gives you an ability to be patient in this extremely dangerous and unprecedented crisis, that you do."
Harris is not burdened by what has been like hydrants with no water.
And I just read that Harris has declined to do the usual tour of the VP quarters with the incoming VP, J.D. Vance. Several excuses, apparently, though one of them is her dealing with the CA fires. Huh?
Most streets in this world are two way.
Sock puppets?
You may want to hit sickbay and have that TDS checked out.
What does the Once and Future President (can't happen soon enough) have to do with this issue currently?
Maybe stop watching MSNBC.
For starters, Vallejo is a pit since base closure. A real estate wreck with low prices (CA relatively). Should be "cheap" to reset and reboot Naval base there. Maybe even tap into a few more of those excellent Cal Maritme grads down at the end of the street.
Vallejo was a pit when I went to OHP ERO school there in 1982. Maybe this fuel depot closure will allow Vallejo and Richmond (another pit) to siphon off their "excess" to the new community of West Martinez. A half dozen new industrial parks and trailer parks, a VoTech school on site...jobs, jobs, jobs. Where's the downside?
Fear not! The Navy has a plan to recommission this here depot that has had its storage tanks filled with concrete.
https://www.randomlengthsnews.com/archives/2023/04/27/san-pedro-fuel-depot/44547
Enjoy the read. The saga of San Pedro almost makes the LCS look good.
Edit: Off topic but of interest.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2025/01/13/statement-from-president-biden-announcing-the-names-of-cvn-82-and-cvn-83/#:~:text=The%20future%20USS%20William%20J,has%20ever%20put%20to%20sea.
Thank you, Jet. My gut turned a little when I read USS William J. Clinton (CVN-82). But upon reflection, I am OK with it. D.E.I. We have a USNS Harvey Milk (T-AO-206). If we have a catcher, we need a pitcher. Though thinking of an UNREP disturbs me a bit.
Still say there should be a USS Larry Flynt...
https://www.familyphile.com/celebrity-veterans/2018/9/2/larry-flynt-jr-us-army-1958us-navy-1960-1964?format=amp
As we seem unable to escape this silly ship naming scheme, just go all in!
Ye-ow. Larry Flynt was a Radarman? So was I, graduated RD"A" in July 1966 as an RDSA and was a 19 year old RD2 in November 1967, the LPO on my deploying DDG. Small world. Wish it was larger...because: Larry Flynt. USS Larry Flynt (DDG-141)?
Sure. What is good for the wuse is good for the slander.
Never knew that:)
Does ship naming come under the scope of duties of the SECNAV, SECDEF, or CINC?
If so, I hope that by first light on 31 Jan these names will be removed, and names of historical carriers replacing them. No more politician names for warships, unless they also had SIGNIFICANT military service.
Slick Willie "loathed the military" so having his name on a ship is a gigantic "FU" to all who served, or will serve.
As for George W. Bush, he at least served honorably, but as a zoomie, so perhaps naming a NEW AFB after him would be okay, but not any ship.
Are there no out-of-political-fashion people that USAF bases are named after so those could be renamed for GWB?
Or even name the ANG officer training school after him. That would be an appropriate tribute.
No quarrel with naming carriers after historically significant Presidents - two caveats: first and foremost the President must be dead; second the President must be historically significant for really good reasons... GW, Lincoln, TR, Truman, Reagan, all fit the bill. Arguments can be made for Kennedy and Bush Elder. None other since Reagan fit this requirement. Somehow back in the day, LBJ was nicely finessed out of a carrier by having a Zumwalt DDG named for him. Do the same for living Presidents... give'em a DDG or an LPD or a sub (Carter) or an auxiliary... Otherwise, use historically significant carrier names - Enterprise top of the list.
No ships or anything else should ever be named after politicians unless they have done something else outside their political life to warrant it. So Carter would be OK for a sub, and W for a ANG base, JFK gets a patrol craft and Bush 1 an attack aircraft. Truman gets an artiliary piece and TR a rifle. Washington was really a pre-politics figure so he is OK for anything. Ike would certainly fit the bill for significance outside his political career but wasn't associated with any particular weapon system. Perhaps a tank. The Interstate system is perhaps his best memorial. Ford is OK as he served on a carrier during WW2. Vinson, Stennis, Reagan, and Lincoln get nada.
It was a news release from the White House with the current CinC's enthusiastic endorsement that took credit for the endorsement.
If any of the following names is not currently in commission the name of the next carrier should be chosen from the following list: Lexington, Saratoga, Yorktown, Enterprise, Hornet, Wasp.
Currently, the only name in commission on that list is USS Wasp (LHD-1). Enterprise is assigned to a Ford under construction. All others are not in commission or assigned, most for a long time.
If that list is exausted, consider there are plenty more good ones before we name a carrier for a (still living!) political figure (especially one who not only never served in the military but actively avoided the draft), try: Midway, Coral Sea, Langley, Ranger, ... , oh and a personal favorite, Shangri-La.
While I'm on it,
Destoyers and frigates: distinguished past sailors or marines, or important historical ships of these classes, there is no USS Samuel B Roberts in commission, nor a Johnston, Heerman, or Hoel.
Submarines: finally we have partially at least gone back to fish, thank God. [edit, just checked and Wahoo or Tang won't be available for the next SSN class name as they are finally in commission again, as they should be]
A new Enterprise is under construction as a Ford class. I guess Ernest Evans (commander of the Johnston) has an upcoming DDG to be named after him. Approve your other suggestions as the action of Samar is perhaps the finest hour of the USN.
We’re such a betting market to appear, I’d bet on any other than aforementioned Enterprise going to baby-CVs of the America class.
Gee, it’s almost like the folks in charge are working for the other side. If they were, in fact, working for the other side, what would they do any differently?
Didn’t Johnny Chung say the Clinton White House was like the subway? You have to put in coins to open the gates. So now Del Toro will name a CVN after Slick Willie.
Let’s not forget the Buddhist monks who took vows of poverty but contributed handsomely to Al Gore.
To be fair, contributing to the Goracle is a good way to maintain ones poverty.
Blame it on success of WW2 and over-success of military in the Cold War (that was against Russia, when China was a backward Third World zero power only one generation ago). And blame sucking up to the billionaire developers who profited from closures were all Republicans, the Tea Party was Republican, don't blame this on Democrats. If you want to be political then be pro-active with the Republicans we have now. No sailor or pilot or soldier cares which political party gets credit for filling his fuel tank.
This is what is called a personal goal / position description goal mismatch resulting in decisions that only make sense from the personal goal (advancement, personal wealth enrichment) perspective. There are possible other "whys" but exploring those might involve a federal grand jury...
California needs a secure location to house San Francisco's homeless. The Navy will simply have to look elsewhere.
They only move them off the streets of The City and County of San Francisco when the CCP is visiting, then they come back.
You should take a look at who they've shuffled-off to Treasure Island...
corsair: I just found the website for One Treasure Island Affordable Housing. I love the computer-generated illustration of the future development that includes a marina filled with docked sailboats, presumably for homeless yacht owners.
Have been considering a 'Proceedings" article on our lack of prep in basics of warfighting. However, as I get spooled up to do so, I recall an artticle I wrote in 2007 on mental readiness after having a young Marine who was in my NROTC unit commit suicide. Proceedings board rejected the article as "unnecessary."
How many Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, Coast Guardsmen and Space Force plus Vets have we lost since then?
Anyhow, off the top of my head, what is the plan to defend Whidbey Island NAS, where nearly 100% of our airborne EW assets and repair facilities reside if not deployed? How about our Lock-Mart missile facilities in Arizona where most of our SAMS and air/surface missiles are produced? Why do we insist on pulling all of our big decks and many subs into port lined up in a row (aka Pearl Harbor) during Christmas and NY...how are those defended? (According to AirLant Ops when as a Carrier Ops O I asked that question in 2005, was told "because...just because."
Others probably have other areas we are deficit. For example, who in the Navy as the plan to recall to a/d those who have between 20 and 30 years and retired? What does activating our Reserves do to critical US infrastructure jobs? Inquiring minds want to know.
"Proceedings." Have some sticky keys on my old laptop. Young Marine as well. Sorry for the typos.
I was thinking it might be short of Pork-ceedings, like tracking the many specious programs that do nothing for our war fighting ability.
Over to the far right of your posted comment are three small dots. Click on those dots and a comment edit option will open up. Almost all of my comments are edited in some way within a few minutes after I post them in order to correct typos, to make small changes to the grammer or wording, or to correct links that don't work.
Must have missed it. Many thanks! I was looking for exactly that.
A group of PLAN/CCC wargamers are rolling in the aisles as we reduce the number of targets they need to plan for. I was always taught that when you realize you are in a hole, you should stop digging and start climbing. DC has never been more isolated from reality in my lifetime than it is today.
In 2006, I got tapped from the Senior Air War College class to play CC Korea and mentor a junior AWC class for their graduation exercise war game, a full out resumption of the Korean War. 36 seminars. Exactly 3 of us survived 48 hrs with assets in place, and all 3 of us concentrated on LOC's (dropping bridges and chokepoints) and supply depots rather than force on force. All 3 of us got wiped out day 3 when they brought the Chinese in. Oddly enough it was one Army, one Navy (me) and one USAF guy who held the line.
Actually we need to dig more holes - deep holes - and cover them with concrete like China is doing with all their bases. =)
Is that our brilliant defense tactic? I can't shoot well at all when I'm laughing; perhaps they can't either.
There are other option. War on the Rocks. CIMSEC. 19FortyFive etc.
Good points, Sal. I'll look into it. Thanks!
On the Reserve side, we'd be loosing some important people. I've got an sailor who works on electronics for recon aircraft as his civil job. I have to wonder if he's more valuable in that role than where I'd end up sticking him on mobilization. Or he'd be pulled over to a similar role and I'd end up with a gapped billet in the comms shop.
My point exactly. We should be looking in peace time who mobilizes where and their criticality to each side. We have thousands of airline pilots still in the reserves (two son-in-laws included), and folks like your Sailor. Waiting until a war breaks out and trying to add that to the pressures of a full mobilization is crazy. Likewise, who can we call in from the retired rolls to fulfill some non-frontt line rolls? Good to hear from you and thanks.
If we get in to a mother-loving Navy war, it may result in many old guys getting called back to the colors. How good is the recall for the Fleet Reserve and Retired Reserve.
I don’t know - imagine the duration of all training time required for remedial diversity training that will have to be completed and checkboxes checked before recalled OGs can be allowed back into the fleet. It might be faster to just breed new ones.
Yeah, I actually have a few started and thinking through their process I understand how the final product can end up being genuinely boring some months. They really need to balance their board out with some qualified outsiders. I would suggest a few regulars on Midrats and the usual circle.
Is anyone wargaming this? Yes. China.
Who exactly makes these decisions?
These people do, Don. https://www.startpage.com/av/proxy-image?piurl=https%3A%2F%2Fimage.tmdb.org%2Ft%2Fp%2Foriginal%2F1Nb27vtpb6ua72x5KPgdY6MXjYa.jpg&sp=1736874387T73b5927006412537c39644058e14e5a51aff4f959b60eee9aab7519f431cecff
Who has been running the country for the past 4 years?
Here is a recent class picture of the actual "Cubicle People" who have been.
https://x.com/WhiteHouse/status/1603925465990893568
Wow, Sid! Thank you for the b_tch slap back into reality. That's too many coffee gofers. Lord, I hope those folks spent most of their time on smartphones doing mindless "me" stuff. To think them involved in decision-making....I mean, plenty of young people are smart, but that doesn't always translate to good, sound decision-making. I have my own problem deciding the type and quantity of food I ingest. But they are a photogenic bunch. Duty is in the eye of the beholder. **sigh**
The raison d'etre for this facility, the nextdoor Martinez refinery, is closing. I'd suspect that the hardened fuel tanks are leaking. And Martinez has been a poster child for the environmental woes of "old California".
I drive past here weekly. Martinez, despite their history with the petroleum industry, is also highly prized for housing. The county is trying to encourage development of its historic downtown and the entire area south of hwy-4 has seen housing prices explode. Neighborhoods surrounding and above downtown are old and have the vibe from another era = hipster families and re-gentrifiers not interested in subdivision housing that is the rest of Contra Costa County.
We are infiltrated with traitors. Hopefully Trump starts cleaning house fast . It's not even a little stretch to see it was deliberate and planned
It would be GOOD if it were traitors. These people are really that ignorant of history.
I don't think they are traitors, that would require them to think of something other than themselves and their own pocketbooks.
"During the BRAC/Peace Dividend/Jesus Jones era during the Clinton Administration, the US military and especially the US Navy abandoned almost all of California except for a rump presence in San Diego with scatterings here and there. That includes a wholesale abandonment of what could be argued to be the most strategically located, most secure, almost bespoke geographically designed for a naval power—San Francisco Bay. Many more were closed outside BRAC for…reasons."
Agree, but it has been 25 years (a quarter century!) since the Clinton administration left office. The George W Bush, Obama, and Trump administrations all acknowledged that China was a growing national security problem. Yet nothing was done to preserve our West Coast naval infrastructure. Why has this been "too hard" for 25 years?
Remember in 2017 when the new Trump administration proclaimed "the Return of Great Power Competition"? That was eight years ago. What have we done since then to prepare the Air Force and Navy (the most relevant services) to deter/fight China or Russia? We keep talking about the problem but not actually doing much other than kicking the can down the road.
Yes there are various programs that will hopefully come to fruition over the next ten years. But China isn't going to sit still for the next ten years. The so-called pacing threat is outrunning us.
One of W. big mistakes was not undoing some of the Clinton cuts after 9/11. Like bringing back some the units and air wings.
Consider who was SECDEF then and his wishes?
consider the lightweight put up for SecDef today, in confirmation hearings this week
Study up on your art history....
I think the USA defends Japan with the Phillipines a bit iffy. Taiwan will not be defended other than to supply arms. Trumps focus is on the American landmass north and south. I think it's inevitable that we end up as fortress America and no longer pax America.
NORTH AMERICA VS. THE WORLD AIN'T GONNA BE A HOCKEY GAME!