PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Future Carrier (Including Costs)
View Single Post
Old 29th Nov 2018, 20:11
  #5316 (permalink)  
Lonewolf_50
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 64
Posts: 7,228
Received 415 Likes on 258 Posts
Originally Posted by glad rag
So when exactly did the USA switch to Single Front warfare capabilities?
Clinton Administration, why do you ask? Were you really unaware of how deep the cuts went during that 8 year period?
The Two Major Regional Contingencies force, which was the basis of the original Bush/Cheney "the cold war is over" drawdown, died in the mid to late 90's when Clinton/Panetta accelerated the draw down and steppened the slope. Since then, the size of the Navy has shrunk yet again, significantly, spreading less jam over the same slice of bread.
The US has been left with "one Major Regional Contingency and hope for the rest" or as the eternal optimists call it "One MRC and hold" ... "on yeah, and rely on allies" which is another topic entirely. (Some allies are easier to work with than others ... it all depends on what one is trying to accomplish)
That's the standing capability. (IMO, at best)
The decision to go into Iraq was a surge, and was based on the "this won't take long" fantasy in Rummy and Cheney's fevered imaginations.
It became a sustained effort, and then a sustained surge, of capability that exposed some interesting holes in the underwear. These holes were allegedly to be addressed in the "Recapitalization Program" that General Casey briefed the Congress on in the early 00's.
And then came the 8 years under Obama, and a (not unreasonable) political objective to trim down a defense establishment that had bloated a bit in the previous 8 years, and particularly the previous 5 once Iraq became a thing.
Handled clumsily, at best. The infamous political scrap that turned into "sequester" had some knock on effects.
Trump has been throwing money at some problems: I honestly don't understand what his priorities are. Dealing with a shrunken fleet seems not to be one of them.
We'll see if Secretary Mattis sticks around long enough to stabilize the larger muscle movements. (Trump can't seem to keep anyone on staff for very long; either he tires of them, or they tire of him. That has an impact on any mid to long term planning and programming).
Lonewolf_50 is offline