Originally Posted by
West Coast
It’s been opined by those who should know (not I) that this will entail the navy getting funds that were earmarked for other services. Let the cat fight move from the eternal simmer to outright open warfare.
Yep,I think you are on target there Westy.
But, since there can be no appropriation for more than two years (see the Constitution), someone embarking on a 15 - 20 year ship building program is going to have to battle year after year to keep that program alive. The House of Representatives holds the purse strings on defense appropriations.
For a simlar historical reference, the 600-ship-Navy and the resignation of SecNav James Webb, mid-to-late 80's.
Then again, the Biden administration could very well say the current state of the navy is sufficient.
Yeah, they could. The USAF is, I am sure, already staffing a position paper to send his way that says exactly that. So too the Gang in Green, aka, the US Army.
As a Naval officer (retired) and sometimes strategic thinker, I am frequently baffled by the raw BS that the Chief of Staff of the Air Force comes up with to claim that the USAF can do what the Navy does. (See that idiot McPeak and "virtual presence" in the mid 90's). I am sure the USAF will come up with more of the same this time around. The "US is a maritime nation" is 100% true. What isn't true is that this guarantees the USN first dip into the budget cup. (My further comments on the abortion that was the Defense Reorg of 1947 will not be regurgitated here).
@etudiant: I note that the author of that piece has been inside the belly of the beast on ship acquisition. (
Everett Pyatt is a former assistant secretary of U.S. Navy for shipbuilding and logistics.)
Getting ship cost under control is a major task for the next administration. That must begin with this project if there is to be any hope of achieving the
355-ship Navy defined by law, and preliminary to any expansion above the current 355-ship law and dream.
Ain't that the truth.