Trump's Promises

[DailyDiesel]

37 minutes ago, HeavyGunner said:

Did you watch him sign the 3 executive orders yesterday? Have you not been hearing every news station whining about trump working revamping healthcare?  He hit the ground running and has done more than most politician do in a year on day one. So I say he's kept his word as best as he could. 

Just having a little fun with you is all.

By the way, to put things in perspective, President Obama signed two executive orders on his first day, and three on his second, 16 for his first month. 

[david wild]

Trump did more good before signing in and has been kicking ass ever since, are you people so stupid to think that he can just wave a magic wand and all is good, well he is doing pretty good for a Government outsider, he's done more good in short time than O sh## for brains did in 8 years, get real. take a look at what he has done so far all good and O sh&& for brains could have done the same but he hated this country was never going to do anything good for the working people.

[TeamsterGrrrl]

Trump would be better off if he just shut up and laid low the next 4 years... He's just digging himself a deeper hole!

[1958 F.W.D.]

3 minutes ago, TeamsterGrrrl said:

Trump would be better off if he just shut up and laid low the next 4 years... He's just digging himself a deeper hole!

Why? He's done more for National Security in the last 4 days than The Light Bringer did in 8 years. 

Now Rob Emmanuel (who has managed to crawl out from under the Light Bringer's desk.....no wait scratch that, HAD to get out from under the Light Bringer's desk because Light Bringer got fired.....) has asked Trump for help with the homicide rate in Chicago........

[carlotpilot]

49 minutes ago, 1958 F.W.D. said:

Why? He's done more for National Security in the last 4 days than The Light Bringer did in 8 years. 

Now Rob Emmanuel (who has managed to crawl out from under the Light Bringer's desk.....no wait scratch that, HAD to get out from under the Light Bringer's desk because Light Bringer got fired.....) has asked Trump for help with the homicide rate in Chicago........

would tickle the hell out of me if trump just said      live with it

[theakerstwo]

We would have been better off if we had no president for the last 8 years.He caused us so much money and we the tax payers got nothing in return.This man was like hillary about lieing.He was trying to damage America as fast as he could.

[TeamsterGrrrl]

But when it comes to damaging America, nobody can match Trump!

[Underdog]

But when it comes to damaging America, nobody can match Trump!

Only started on repairing the damage of the past 20 years. Amazing summation on your part of a president who has a track record of oh ... Let's see now... 4 DAYS!?!

[storkmack]

1 hour ago, Underdog said:

Only started on repairing the damage of the past 20 years. Amazing summation on your part of a president who has a track record of oh ... Let's see now... 4 DAYS!?!

Very well stated, but I wouldn't waste my time responding to her post.  Oppps , I guess I am.    A  good liberal Democrat is not going to give Trump a chance.   They have the belief that all business is bad and that the people that run them are worse.  Someone of that mindset is not going to change their minds.   

[kscarbel2]

You guys certainly enjoy a colorful discussion. I enjoy hearing everyone's thoughts, as you all bring valid points to the table.

We're all different. As has been said, if we were all exactly the same, the world would be a pretty dull place.

In my mind, the last great president with significant accomplishments was Dwight D. Eisenhower. What can I say......I have high expectations in a president.

I myself don't think Obama was any worse that George W. Bush, who, I feel, created a real mess in foreign affairs (e.g. Al Qaeda, ISIS, ect.). 

[storkmack]

I want to hear from all sides, you never know what you may pick up. 

[Brocky]

I LIKE IKE!!!  And yes, I am old enough to remember that campaign slogan.

KSC, very well said. I like many of Trump's ideas but only time will tell if they will work.

[mowerman]

Too much political for me to read....But I find it interesting all these Democrats comedian s can bash the piss outa trump....But couldn't say anything about the all mighty obambi like whaaaaaaaaat???????
 

[david wild]

Funny how everything Trump does they want to condemn, yet everything he does is for the good of the country, another words screw America and libs love you, stand up and do what's right for America and you doing bad ????? something wrong with that picture   

[1958 F.W.D.]

19 hours ago, TeamsterGrrrl said:

But when it comes to damaging America, nobody can match Trump!

I say again: Why? He's done more for National Security in the last 4 days than The Light Bringer did in 8 years. 

[41chevy]

5 hours ago, 1958 F.W.D. said:

I say again: Why? He's done more for National Security in the last 4 days than The Light Bringer did in 8 years. 

Don't you feel The Light Bringer scrapping 6 aircraft carriers (5 of which were reserve) and gutting the military didn't help the National Security of Russia, Iran and China? They did promise to be his friend.....

Edited January 28, 2017 by 41chevy

[kscarbel2]

C'mon Paul. You can't blame are Navy's unacceptably small size, including carriers, on Obama. Any ex-Navy man can tell you that our Navy has been shrinking since the end of the Vietnam war.

I myself want a return to a large and well-funded Navy. But every presidential administration since Nixon has underfunded the Navy.

As a result, for example, rather than buy similar replacements for the "purpose-designed" A6 bomber and F-14 air superiority fighter, the Navy was forced to buy an inferior flying compromise, the F-18, saddled with both missions, all because they weren't funded to do the right thing.

Our oldest Ohio Class ballistic submarines are as old as 41 years, and their replacement (Columbia Class) is still a 3D picture.

By 1990, President H.W. Bush had sent our four battleships (Iowa, Missouri, New Jersey and Wisconsin), which had figured so prominently during the first Iraq War, back into retirement. These platforms, modernized, had (have) vast potential. Nothing send a "message" better than the sight of a dreadnought.

(And there's also the strong argument that the aircraft carrier, with today's weapons in mind, is a sitting duck. That's a now vulnerable critical wheel need to cleverly re-invent.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

U.S. Navy Active Ship Force Levels, 1972-1978

DATE ^	6/30/72	6/30/73	6/30/74	6/30/75	6/30/76	6/30/77	9/30/78
BATTLESHIPS	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
CARRIERS	17	16	14	15	13	13	13
CRUISERS	27	29	28	27	26	26	28
DESTROYERS	132	139	119	102	99	92	95
FRIGATES	66	71	64	64	64	64	65
SUBMARINES	94	84	73	75	74	77	81
SSBNS	41	41	41	41	41	41	41
COMMAND SHIPS	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
MINE WARFARE	31	34	34	34	25	25	25
PATROL	16	14	14	14	13	6	3
AMPHIBIOUS	77	65	65	64	65	65	67
AUXILIARY	153	148	135	123	116	114	113
SURFACE WARSHIPS	225	239	211	193	189	182*	188
TOTAL ACTIVE	654	641	587	559	536	523	531

 

EVENTS
•  Last U.S. forces withdraw from South Vietnam following the ceasefire 1973. •  South Vietnam falls to North Vietnamese communists 1975.

 

NOTES
^     Beginning with FY 78, the fiscal year runs 1 October through 30 September. *     Post-Vietnam low for surface warships.

U.S. Navy Active Ship Force Levels, 1979-1985

DATE	9/30/79	9/30/80	9/30/81	9/30/82	9/30/83	9/30/84	9/30/85
BATTLESHIPS	-	-	-	-	1	2	2
CARRIERS	13	13	12	13	13	13	13
CRUISERS	28	26	27	27	28	29	30
DESTROYERS	97	94	91	89	71	69	69
FRIGATES	65	71	78	86	95	103	110
SUBMARINES	80	82	87	96	98	98	100
SSBNS	41	40	34	33	34	35	37
COMMAND SHIPS	-	3	4	4	4	4	4
MINE WARFARE	25	25	25	25	21	21	21
PATROL	3	3	1	4	6	6	6
AMPHIBIOUS	67	63	61	61	59	57	58
AUXILIARY	114	110	101	117	103	120	121
SURFACE WARSHIPS	190	191	196	202	195	203	211
TOTAL ACTIVE	533	530	521*	555	533	557	571

 

EVENTS
•  Grenada operation 1983. •  Attempted peacekeeping in Lebanon 1983.

 

NOTES
*     Post-Vietnam War low (total active ships).

U.S. Navy Active Ship Force Levels, 1986-1992

DATE	9/30/86	9/30/87	9/30/88	9/30/89	9/30/90	9/30/91	9/30/92
BATTLESHIPS	3	3	3	4	4	1	-
CARRIERS	14	14	14	14	13	15	14
CRUISERS	32	36	38	40	43	47	49
DESTROYERS	69	69	69	68	57	47	40
FRIGATES	113	115	107	100	99	93	67
SUBMARINES	101	102	100	99	93	87	85
SSBNS	39	37	37	36	33	34	30
COMMAND SHIPS	4	4	4	4	4	4	4
MINE WARFARE	21	22	22	23	22	22	16
PATROL	6	6	6	6	6	6	6
AMPHIBIOUS	58	59	59	61	59	61	58
AUXILIARY	23	127	114	137	137	112	102
SURFACE WARSHIPS	217	223^	217	212	203	188	156
TOTAL ACTIVE	583	594*	573	592	570	529	471

 

EVENTS
•  Fall of the Berlin Wall and many East European communist governments, 1989-1990. •  Gulf mobilization and war, 1990-1991. •  Dissolution of the Soviet Union and end of the Cold War, 1991.

 

EVENTS
^     1980s high for surface warships. *     1980s high for total active ships. A rapid decline in force level is evident after the anticommunist revolutions in Eastern Europe and the collapse of the Soviet Union, 1989-1991.

U.S. Navy Active Ship Force Levels, 1993-1999

DATE	9/30/93	9/30/94	9/30/95	9/30/96	9/30/97	9/30/98	8/17/99
BATTLESHIPS	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
CARRIERS	13	12	12	12	12	12	12
CRUISERS	52	35	32	31	30	29	27
DESTROYERS	37	41	47	51	56	50	52
FRIGATES	59	51	49	43	42	38	37
SUBMARINES	88	88	83	79	73	65	57
SSBNS	22	18	16	17	18	18	18
COMMAND SHIPS	4	4	4	4	4	4	4
MINE WARFARE	15	16	18	18	18	18	18
PATROL	2	7	12	13	13	13	13
AMPHIBIOUS	52	38	39	40	41	40	41
AUXILIARY	110	94	80	67	52	57	57
SURFACE WARSHIPS	148	127	128	123	122	109	106
TOTAL ACTIVE	454	404	392	375	359	344	337

 

NOTES
End of the Cold War 'peace dividend' leads to decommissioning of many older ships, especially cruisers and auxiliaries, in a manner similar to downsizing at the end of the Vietnam war.

U.S. Navy Active Ship Force Levels, 2000 - 2006

DATE	9/30/00	9/30/01	9/30/02	9/30/03	9/30/04	9/30/05	9/30/06
CARRIERS	12	12	12	12	12	12	12
CRUISERS	27	27	27	27	25	23	22
DESTROYERS	54	53	55	49	48	46	50
FRIGATES	35	35	33	30	30	30	30
SUBMARINES	56	55	54	54	54	54	54
SSBN	18	18	18	16	14	14	14
SSGN	0	0	0	2	4	4	4
MINE WARFARE	18	18	17	17	17	17	16
AMPHIBIOUS	41	41	41	38	37	37	35
AUXILIARY	57	57	56	52	51	45	44
SURFACE WARSHIPS	128	127	127	118	115	111*	114
TOTAL ACTIVE	318	316	313	297	292	282	281

 

NOTES

•  9/11 and the GWOT does not increase Navy ship force levels. •  START treaty limits encourage creation of SSGN class, fleet ballistic missile submarines converted to carry conventional strike cruise missiles. Older surface warships continue to be replaced at a less than one-to-one ratio. *     Low since 1921 •    To clarify the ship numbers included in this table, the year 2000 entries include active commissioned ships, those in the Naval Reserve Force (NRF) and ships operated by the Military Sealift Command (MSC).  Row entries are self-explanatory, with the auxiliary category including combat logistic ships (such as oilers, ammunition, combat store ships), mobile logistics ships (such as submarine tenders) and support ships (such as command, salvage, tugs and research ships).  Command ships have been subsumed into that category and the separate line entry removed.  A new row has been added for guided missile submarines (SSGN). Post-1999 data provided by N8F.

U.S.Navy Active Ship Force Levels, 2007 to 2010

DATE	9/30/07	9/30/08	9/30/09	9/30/10
CARRIERS	11	11	11	11
CRUISERS	22	22	22	22
DESTROYERS	52	54	57	59
FRIGATES	30	30	30	29
LCS		1	1	2
PATROL COASTAL	0	0	0	0
SSN	53	53	53	53
SSBN	14	14	14	14
SSGN	4	4	4	4
MINE WARFARE	14	14	14	14
AMPHIBIOUS	33	34	33	33
AUXILIARY	46	45	46	47
SURFACE WARSHIPS	115	118	121	123
TOTAL ACTIVE	278	282	285	288

U.S.Navy Active Ship Force Levels, 2011 to 2016

	9/30/11	9/30/12	9/30/13	9/30/14	9/30/15	9/30/16
Combatant (Warship)	221	222	217	222	201	204
Aircraft Carrier (CVN)	11	11	10	10	10	10
Cruiser (CG)	22	22	22	22	22	22
Destroyer (DDG)	61	62	62	62	62	62
Destroyer (DDG 1000)	-	-	-	-	-	1
Frigate (FFG)	26	23	17	10	-	-
Littoral (LCS)	2	3	4	4	5	8
Patrol Coastal (PC)	-	-	-	10^	-	-
Attack Submarine (SSN)	53	54	54	55	54	52
Ballistic Missile Submarine (SSBN)	14	14	14	14	14	14
Guided Missile Submarine (SSGN)	4	4	4	4	4	4
Amphibious Assault Ship [General] (LHA)	1	1	1	2	1	1
Amphibious Transport Dock (LHD)	8	8	8	8	8	8
Amphibious Assault Ship [Multi] (LPD)	7	8	9	9	9	10
Landing Dock Ship (LSD)	12	12	12	12	12	12
Combatant (Other)	63	65	68	67	70	71
Mine Countermeasures Ship (MCM)	14	14	13	8	11	11
Ammunition Ship (T-AE)	1	1	1	-	-	0
Fleet Replenishment Oiler (T-AO)	15	15	15	15	15	15
Fast Combat Support Ship (T-AOE)	4	4	4	3	3	2
Dry Cargo & Ammunition Ship (T-AKE)	11	11	12	12	12	12
Command Ship (LCC)	2	2	2	2	2	2
Submarine Tender (AS)	2	2	2	2	2	2
*Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV)      Expeditionary Fast Transport (T-EPF)	-	-	2	4	5	7
Surveillance Ship (T-AGOS)	5	5	5	5	5	5
Salvage Ship (T-ARS)	4	4	4	4	4	4
Fleet Ocean Tug (T-ATF)	4	4	4	4	4	4
(MPS T-AKE)	1	2	2	2	2	2
Afloat Forward Staging Base (AFSB)	-	1	1	1	1	1
*Afloat Forward Staging Base/         Expeditionary Sea Base (T-ESB)	-	-	-	-	-	1
*Mobile Landing Platform (MLP)      Expeditionary Transfer Dock (T-ESD)	-	-	1	2	3	2
Hospital Ship (T-AH)	-	-	-	2	-	-
High Speed Transport (T-HST)	-	-	-	1	1	1
TOTAL BATTLE FORCE LEVEL	284	287	285	289	271	275

^ Patrol Coastal (PC) were counted in the battle force level only for FY 2014.

*JHSV and MLP classifications changed to T-EPF and T-ESD in August 2015.  Additionally, the classification T-ESB was created for AFSBs used for expeditionary support. 

Published:Tue Dec 06 14:17:14 EST 2016

[41chevy]

I'm 100% wrong , you're are 100% correct, Obama had absolutely nothing to do with it in fact he tried to save them all.  So Sorry for my mispost. .Five were reserve carriers that I did not think being moth balled counted as active ships. Navy Time is apparently also misinformed with their article too.

When a crisis break out, the first question the President of the United States asks is, “Where are the carriers?” It’s very understandable. Since December, 1941, the aircraft carrier has been America’s first responder to war and crises short of war. The nuclear-powered carriers (CVNs) in service displace about 100,000 tons of water, can reach speeds of over 30 knots, and can deliver several squadrons of aircraft to a crisis spot.

There is a price for this capability. Carriers are expensive – a Nimitz-class carrier costs $4.5 billion to build. The new Gerald R. Ford-class carrier will cost almost $10.5 billion per ship, not counting the R&D costs. They also take a long time to build. It takes at least four years, and in some cases as many as seven to build a nuclear-powered carrier, from laying the keel to commissioning. The Navy had kept all four Forrestal-class carriers and three of the four Kitty Hawk-class carriers (CVs) in reserve. USS America (CV 66) was sunk as a target to acquire data on the effects of combat damage on supercarriers, data used in the design of the Gerald R. Ford-class carriers.

These seven carriers were oil-burning ships, with less endurance than the CVNs, but still able to deliver hurt to the bad guys. So, they were mothballed, ready to be reactivated in a time of crisis. That was the case until 2013.

Since the start of 2014, the Obama Administration has been rushing these conventional-fuelled ships to Brownsville, Texas, where they are being scrapped. Four of these ships, USS Forrestal (CV 59), USS Saratoga (CV 60), USS Ranger (CV 61), and USS Constellation (CV 64) have been towed to Brownsville, the USS Independence (CV 62), was added in 2015. That is bad enough, but a sixth carrier, USS Enterprise (CVN 65), was also slated to the scrap yard by 2017.

 

Edited January 28, 2017 by 41chevy

[kscarbel2]

In 1972, the United States had 17 aircraft carriers. Stop and think of that global footprint for a moment.

But by 1976, we were down to 13.

We had 13 from 1986 to 1994.

And then, the new reduced capability standard of 12 from 1994 to 2006.

11, from 2007 to 2012.

And then 10 from 2013 to the present.

Every President from Ford on has been under-funding the U.S. Navy, and today a review of our naval bases will quickly tell you that it is a mere shell of its former self. Newport News Shipbuilding, the carrier "factory", is less than half as busy as it once was (I've long been troubled that in modern times, NNS is the "only" designer, builder and refueler of the nuclear carriers........never put all your eggs in one basket.).

It says something that the U.S. Marines can be the world's most formidable fighting force even though they have been under-funded for decades as well. And we all know how under-funded the Coast Guard has long been.

The scrapped carriers, though legendary (e.g. Forrestal), were old. Of course, who doesn't have a warm place in their heart for the "Big E".

I rode the Nimitz out on its first cruise.

The Exocet cruise missile that sunk the HMS Sheffield during the Falklands war though opened everyone's eyes once and for all to the modern day vulnerability of the aircraft carrier. Nothing like having forces forward positioned, but if they can so easily be taken out..............

I don't see the Ford-Class carriers as being any less vulnerable.

Based on what we read, it's puzzling how we allow our defense contractors to be hacked, placing our current and next generation defense systems into the hands of our would-be adversaries.

[TeamsterGrrrl]

You guys sound like your building your fantasy navy to fight World War Two again. Now that most any country or terrorist group can build or acquire their own drones, weaponize civilian vehicles and craft, and even stash suitcase sized nuclear weapons for remote activation... Your whole "big navy" strategy is obsolete.

[kscarbel2]

5 minutes ago, TeamsterGrrrl said:

You guys sound like your building your fantasy navy to fight World War Two again. Now that most any country or terrorist group can build or acquire their own drones, weaponize civilian vehicles and craft, and even stash suitcase sized nuclear weapons for remote activation... Your whole "big navy" strategy is obsolete.

I didn't mean to imply that. My principal point is that our armed forced have been underfunded for decades.

The Navy, Marines and Coast Guard need a massive funding boost to reach what I'll define as "normal"...........or today's threats (ect. DF-21 cruise missile).

If I had my way, I'd put the Air Force back under the Army. 

[TeamsterGrrrl]

Underfunded? We spend over half the federal discretionary budget on the military. We spend more on our military than the rest of the world combined.

[kscarbel2]

16 minutes ago, TeamsterGrrrl said:

Underfunded? We spend over half the federal discretionary budget on the military. We spend more on our military than the rest of the world combined.

My personal opinion, from an "up close" perspective, is that our Navy, Marines and Coast Guard are seriously underfunded.

[TeamsterGrrrl]

So how are the rest of the world's countries managing to defend themselves for a fraction of what we spend?

[kscarbel2]

5 minutes ago, TeamsterGrrrl said:

So how are the rest of the world's countries managing to defend themselves for a fraction of what we spend?

Our traditional allies, with the exception of Japan, are not managing well at all to defend themselves.

http://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/46404-what-the-us-should-learn-from-britain’s-dying-navy/#comment-341940