[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by An ex-Squid [/i]
[B]Tyvar: Well said! I've been in the U.S. Navy for over ten years (six years active and a little over four years in the reserves) and I know for a fact that the U.S. armed forces are far more professional today than they were during the draft era[/B][/QUOTE]
The only problem is we've been cutting the military far too much since the Bush era (Bush the Elder). The Navy is one obvious place to view that, especially with how far they have cut the attack sub force and how much further they want to do it. The number of surface ships is also a lot lower than I'd like. That same trend can be seen in all the other branches of the US armed forces, too.
No, I'm not just saying that because I work for a defense contractor.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Striker [/i]
[B]When Clinton took office in the early 1990s, he actively closed down dozens of military bases all throughout the United States.[/B][/QUOTE]
Wasn't it Congress who was responsible for that?
[QUOTE][B]However, our military statistically speaking is the smallest its been in the last 50 or so years. Some of this is due to our use of highly advanced technology which allows for us to operate more efficiently. [/B][/QUOTE]
Very little of this is due to our use of tech. It's more due to a perceived need to cut military spending to pay off the debt or, these days, Bush's tax cuts. I'd rather not have the tax cuts if it means bringing the size of the military and training/supplying back up to sane levels.
[QUOTE][B]I'm sure in the next 10 years our military will be about the same levels as 1993 or 1994 due to increased funding. In fact, the Navy is adding a lot of new people due to the new carriers coming on-line.[/B][/QUOTE]
I wouldn't count on that. New carriers coming online will be replacing old ones that are being retired. There have also been news stories that the administration wants to cut the already over-stretched sub fleet from 50-55 to 35-37. In case someone wants to write off my claims:
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by ShadowDancer [/i]
[B]security issues and all?:) isnt that a seawolf class? were u working on her or something? [/B][/QUOTE]
In order:
1. Something like that.
2. USS Virginia, first boat of the Virginia Class.
3. As an engineer, yes.
It's fun stuff, really. I get to perform a wide range of tasks, including problem solving, project management, a bit of supervisory stuff, design work, support work, budgets, and a heck of a lot of writing. It also involves a lot of meeting with co-workers, the government and vendors.
In fact, I'll be on a business trip later this week (along with recovering from 10 hours of travel for a couple of days after that).
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by E.T [/i]
[B]They should cut bureaucrasy expenses first. (I guess it's same with every government) Well, actually I'm pretty worried about China's attitude and fact that they're expanding their naval forces. [/B][/QUOTE]
China also learned quite a bit from our wars in Kosovo and Iraq (x2). They're using that to redesign their strategy and the composition of their armed forces, which are a lot more modern than people may think.
Comments
[B]Tyvar: Well said! I've been in the U.S. Navy for over ten years (six years active and a little over four years in the reserves) and I know for a fact that the U.S. armed forces are far more professional today than they were during the draft era[/B][/QUOTE]
The only problem is we've been cutting the military far too much since the Bush era (Bush the Elder). The Navy is one obvious place to view that, especially with how far they have cut the attack sub force and how much further they want to do it. The number of surface ships is also a lot lower than I'd like. That same trend can be seen in all the other branches of the US armed forces, too.
No, I'm not just saying that because I work for a defense contractor.
[B]When Clinton took office in the early 1990s, he actively closed down dozens of military bases all throughout the United States.[/B][/QUOTE]
Wasn't it Congress who was responsible for that?
[QUOTE][B]However, our military statistically speaking is the smallest its been in the last 50 or so years. Some of this is due to our use of highly advanced technology which allows for us to operate more efficiently. [/B][/QUOTE]
Very little of this is due to our use of tech. It's more due to a perceived need to cut military spending to pay off the debt or, these days, Bush's tax cuts. I'd rather not have the tax cuts if it means bringing the size of the military and training/supplying back up to sane levels.
[QUOTE][B]I'm sure in the next 10 years our military will be about the same levels as 1993 or 1994 due to increased funding. In fact, the Navy is adding a lot of new people due to the new carriers coming on-line.[/B][/QUOTE]
I wouldn't count on that. New carriers coming online will be replacing old ones that are being retired. There have also been news stories that the administration wants to cut the already over-stretched sub fleet from 50-55 to 35-37. In case someone wants to write off my claims:
[url]http://www.pcnet.com/~jdutka/USSVirginia1.jpg[/url]
Yes, I'm in the picture and no, I won't tell you where.
Well, actually I'm pretty worried about China's attitude and fact that they're expanding their naval forces.
[url]http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/row/plan/index.html[/url]
[B] In case someone wants to write off my claims:
[url]http://www.pcnet.com/~jdutka/USSVirginia1.jpg[/url]
Yes, I'm in the picture and no, I won't tell you where. [/B][/QUOTE]
security issues and all?:) isnt that a seawolf class? were u working on her or something?
[B]security issues and all?:) isnt that a seawolf class? were u working on her or something? [/B][/QUOTE]
In order:
1. Something like that.
2. USS Virginia, first boat of the Virginia Class.
3. As an engineer, yes.
It's fun stuff, really. I get to perform a wide range of tasks, including problem solving, project management, a bit of supervisory stuff, design work, support work, budgets, and a heck of a lot of writing. It also involves a lot of meeting with co-workers, the government and vendors.
In fact, I'll be on a business trip later this week (along with recovering from 10 hours of travel for a couple of days after that).
[B]They should cut bureaucrasy expenses first. (I guess it's same with every government) Well, actually I'm pretty worried about China's attitude and fact that they're expanding their naval forces. [/B][/QUOTE]
China also learned quite a bit from our wars in Kosovo and Iraq (x2). They're using that to redesign their strategy and the composition of their armed forces, which are a lot more modern than people may think.