I am the son of a Merchant Mariner, and I am a Marine. The declines of our shipping industries, Coast Guard, and Navy fleets and capabilities has been stewing inside of me for half a century. We are late, we are late, we are late. Perhaps not "too"
More (strident, anxious, earnest) voices raised, and laid at the doorstep of every legislator, from every state and district! We ALL need to be aware and concerned.
My only criticism is that I read "...as sea levels rise" before I got to the caveat "If you ignore the sacrificial clause to the cult of climate change, that is simply spot on". I want to share your optimism but that Climate Change reference by SECNAV kind of put me off.
I really struggle with this. Anyone could have delivered the SECNAV speech, albeit from a less significant position. We have seen this administration and this SECNAV for a few years. Well before these remarkable words has been an opportunity to drive change in the department, and I do not believe we have seen one iota of significant change driven from him. To the degree remote and autonomous systems are advancing in the navy, that effort was inherited. Have I missed something about taking charge and delivering something of substance on a major surface combatant replacement? Multiple DDG Flight III buys make fiscal sense, but do nothing to expand the shipbuilding industrial base, and arguably delay work the the replacement DDG/CG.
Once again, Commander is right on most points. But I disagree with his snide remark about climate change. Probably because I live in Alaska, where the effects have been so obvious for so long that even a "conservative" (reactionary?) government - the only US jurisdiction to, by executive order, make it worth a year in jail to drive to the next town during the pandemic - state visitor centers have proclaimed our loss of ice to be an indicator for over 3 decades. Our state university ties the University of Stockholm for climate research - and leads most of the world. Even the most rabid climate activists are TOO CONSERVATIVE. IF we could stop the human caused drivers entirely today - and we cannot - things are going to get far worse than almost anyone expects. Storms. Rising sea levels (except for places like Alaska, where we are still rising due to loss of the weight of ice cover - so sea levels are falling). If you are not budgeting to mitigate storm damage, or to harden bases from storms, you are going to be caught flat footed when operational forces are forced to deal with them WITHOUT having planned to pay for them. There should be NATIONAL research - not just the University of Alaska.
Any attempt to implement solutions will fall apart immediatley.
There is no way to revive the merchant marine without substantial protection and subsidies throughout every aspect of the supply chain from the steel mills to the shipyards. Thus far, only one candidate for high office I know of resists the siren song of "free trade." (What really hurts is that containerization is almost entirely an American concept.)
As for the Navy, we should first determine its purpose. If that purpose is to resist the entire Eurasian landmass then 590 much less 290 ships will not be enough especially a Navy seeped in the Marxist claptrap of DEI, CRT, LGBTQ, Green Energy, pronouns, etc.
Our maritime problems are symptoms of much deeper problems.
"We spend decades pretending to be a continental land power. Joined with an almost criminal neglect of our maritime sector deposited at the tail end of a box canyon of our own creation. "
The result of a Congress that is pre-occupied with things at the end of their nose, at the most basic level, the only comprehension they have of the military is rifle & boots or, airplane/helicopter. Ships, submarines, maintenance requirements, material sourcing all too complicated, hence the Army swoops-in and woos the elected-types. Meanwhile, the Beltway Navy naval gazes, glancing down the Potomac thanking themselves they don't have to go down river to Norfolk.
My only question is, where the heck has the Navy League been the last 30 years? This has been their literal wheelhouse and they've been ineffectual at best.
A glimmer of hope. It is nice to see the leadership using most of the right words and concepts, but I still wonder why we need ‘ a new bold approach’ when the concepts are pretty much unchanged from Mahon’s initial ideas and the Regan era. We should just have maintained the old strategy(ies) and we wouldn’t be doing the fire drill now. I share the distaste for the Climate Change reference (but firmly believe in good stewardship) and really cringe at the Biden administration’s overuse of the ‘whole of government’ phrase borrowed from European socialists.
Maybe rather than sending $BB to Ukraine in the useless fantasy the Ukes can defeat Russia, which was, is, and shall remain none of our business, we could use those $B to recreate our shipbuilding capacity and again float a 600-ship USN.
Just wondering where our Naval War College is in all this. That is an entity whose lifeblood and marrow ought to be Maritime strategy. Surely the President of the NWC and the CNO could have a Ladies' meeting of minds to get us on the right track?
Naval maritime strategy = maintain the ships we do have in a rust-free state. Until we get that right how can we even dream of a cohesive maritime strategy.
As a son of a retired Sub Tender/AFDB Los Alamos guy…I ponder…does Hizzoner’s underlying strategy cover how WE are going to do this with only TWO CSGs sailing the ocean blue right now. A third can’t seem to get unchained from the pier…we can only pray our enemies are incompetent as we are…
CDR-
At this point I'm just too cynical. The people above CNO seem to be working for this country's destruction.
I am the son of a Merchant Mariner, and I am a Marine. The declines of our shipping industries, Coast Guard, and Navy fleets and capabilities has been stewing inside of me for half a century. We are late, we are late, we are late. Perhaps not "too"
More (strident, anxious, earnest) voices raised, and laid at the doorstep of every legislator, from every state and district! We ALL need to be aware and concerned.
My only criticism is that I read "...as sea levels rise" before I got to the caveat "If you ignore the sacrificial clause to the cult of climate change, that is simply spot on". I want to share your optimism but that Climate Change reference by SECNAV kind of put me off.
I really struggle with this. Anyone could have delivered the SECNAV speech, albeit from a less significant position. We have seen this administration and this SECNAV for a few years. Well before these remarkable words has been an opportunity to drive change in the department, and I do not believe we have seen one iota of significant change driven from him. To the degree remote and autonomous systems are advancing in the navy, that effort was inherited. Have I missed something about taking charge and delivering something of substance on a major surface combatant replacement? Multiple DDG Flight III buys make fiscal sense, but do nothing to expand the shipbuilding industrial base, and arguably delay work the the replacement DDG/CG.
Too many people are even more ignorant landlubbers than me for us to get a great maritime strategy, I'm afraid.
Once again, Commander is right on most points. But I disagree with his snide remark about climate change. Probably because I live in Alaska, where the effects have been so obvious for so long that even a "conservative" (reactionary?) government - the only US jurisdiction to, by executive order, make it worth a year in jail to drive to the next town during the pandemic - state visitor centers have proclaimed our loss of ice to be an indicator for over 3 decades. Our state university ties the University of Stockholm for climate research - and leads most of the world. Even the most rabid climate activists are TOO CONSERVATIVE. IF we could stop the human caused drivers entirely today - and we cannot - things are going to get far worse than almost anyone expects. Storms. Rising sea levels (except for places like Alaska, where we are still rising due to loss of the weight of ice cover - so sea levels are falling). If you are not budgeting to mitigate storm damage, or to harden bases from storms, you are going to be caught flat footed when operational forces are forced to deal with them WITHOUT having planned to pay for them. There should be NATIONAL research - not just the University of Alaska.
Nice words all around. But, just words.
Any attempt to implement solutions will fall apart immediatley.
There is no way to revive the merchant marine without substantial protection and subsidies throughout every aspect of the supply chain from the steel mills to the shipyards. Thus far, only one candidate for high office I know of resists the siren song of "free trade." (What really hurts is that containerization is almost entirely an American concept.)
As for the Navy, we should first determine its purpose. If that purpose is to resist the entire Eurasian landmass then 590 much less 290 ships will not be enough especially a Navy seeped in the Marxist claptrap of DEI, CRT, LGBTQ, Green Energy, pronouns, etc.
Our maritime problems are symptoms of much deeper problems.
"We spend decades pretending to be a continental land power. Joined with an almost criminal neglect of our maritime sector deposited at the tail end of a box canyon of our own creation. "
The result of a Congress that is pre-occupied with things at the end of their nose, at the most basic level, the only comprehension they have of the military is rifle & boots or, airplane/helicopter. Ships, submarines, maintenance requirements, material sourcing all too complicated, hence the Army swoops-in and woos the elected-types. Meanwhile, the Beltway Navy naval gazes, glancing down the Potomac thanking themselves they don't have to go down river to Norfolk.
Sal, You saw Bryan's article about the Navy Commission he was appointed to which has not begun work as Dems are dragging their feet?
My only question is, where the heck has the Navy League been the last 30 years? This has been their literal wheelhouse and they've been ineffectual at best.
A glimmer of hope. It is nice to see the leadership using most of the right words and concepts, but I still wonder why we need ‘ a new bold approach’ when the concepts are pretty much unchanged from Mahon’s initial ideas and the Regan era. We should just have maintained the old strategy(ies) and we wouldn’t be doing the fire drill now. I share the distaste for the Climate Change reference (but firmly believe in good stewardship) and really cringe at the Biden administration’s overuse of the ‘whole of government’ phrase borrowed from European socialists.
Maybe rather than sending $BB to Ukraine in the useless fantasy the Ukes can defeat Russia, which was, is, and shall remain none of our business, we could use those $B to recreate our shipbuilding capacity and again float a 600-ship USN.
Just wondering where our Naval War College is in all this. That is an entity whose lifeblood and marrow ought to be Maritime strategy. Surely the President of the NWC and the CNO could have a Ladies' meeting of minds to get us on the right track?
Naval maritime strategy = maintain the ships we do have in a rust-free state. Until we get that right how can we even dream of a cohesive maritime strategy.
As a son of a retired Sub Tender/AFDB Los Alamos guy…I ponder…does Hizzoner’s underlying strategy cover how WE are going to do this with only TWO CSGs sailing the ocean blue right now. A third can’t seem to get unchained from the pier…we can only pray our enemies are incompetent as we are…
What? A newer and stronger Jones Act to keep Wall Street rich.