canceled.2021.3 (09-20-2020)
Doc Dutch (09-20-2020)
LOL! You must still be drunk from last night. He hasn't 'rebuilt the military', nor can you demonstrate that he has. He's made us a laughing stock in the ME and, according to the Israelis, did essentially nothing of substance to seal the peace deals in the ME.
Please be less stupid.
Ignorant hack
https://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenth.../#59c93a842ee5
ncreased funding for readiness. On the eve of Trump’s election, the Government Accountability Office reported “persistently low readiness levels” in the joint force, which it attributed to high operating tempo, end-strength reductions, under-funding of training activities, and the departure of seasoned weapons maintainers. Military aircraft accidents increased 40% between 2013 and 2017, signaling a deterioration in pilot skills. Military leaders warned only a fraction of the force was ready to fight effectively on short notice.
Against that backdrop, the Trump Pentagon launched a multiphase process to rebuild the military. In 2017, it would increase spending on readiness. In 2018 it would sustain funding for readiness—training, maintenance, etc.—while filling “holes” in the military posture such as inadequate stocks of precision munitions. In 2019 it would begin making down payments on increased lethality to cope with the challenges posed by Russia and China, and in 2020 it would go full-bore on buying a new generation of weapons. Trump’s team saw it would take years to return to a high state of readiness, and so that’s where its plan began.
Investment in core warfighting systems. When President Trump took office, the U.S. military was suffering from decades of under-investment in new technology. The Air Force’s fleet of bombers, fighters and tankers was the oldest it had ever been. The Army’s helicopters and armored vehicles consisted largely of programs begun during the Reagan years (or earlier). Some warfighting systems had grown so decrepit that the military services were proposing their retirement despite a lack of newer weapons with which to replace them.
The Trump team greatly increased funding for development and procurement of new weapons. Outlays for R&D increased over 50% between 2016 and 2020, while outlays for the procurement of weapons rose 35%. Much of this money was devoted to fielding a new generation of warfighting systems, including a more survivable bomber, longer-range rotorcraft and unmanned systems. But funding was also provided to accelerate upgrades to signature warfighting systems such as the Army’s Abrams tank and the Navy’s Virginia-class attack submarines.
Modernization of nuclear forces. Recapitalization of the nation’s aging nuclear arsenal was the first major military initiative Trump cited when he announced he intended to seek the presidency. Deterring nuclear attacks by sustaining a diverse and survivable retaliatory force has long been the foundation of the U.S. defense posture, but by the time Trump decided to run the entire strategic arsenal had grown old, including its command and control network and its industrial complex. Yet the Obama Administration had repeatedly delayed or deferred investment in new nuclear capabilities.
Following release of a nuclear posture review, the Trump Administration affirmed plans to modernize all three legs of the strategic arsenal—sea-based missiles, land-based missiles and bombers—while making major upgrades to the command network and revitalizing industrial facilities. Unlike President Obama, President Trump has never expressed ambivalence about the need for nuclear weapons, including tactical nuclear weapons that can be carried on F-35 fighters and other weapons to match the shorter-range devices Russia deploys in Europe.
Bolstering resilience in space. In the years since the Cold War ended, U.S. military forces have become heavily dependent on satellites for missile warning, secure communications, intelligence and navigation. For instance, a typical Army brigade contains many hundreds of systems dependent on signals from the Global Positioning System to function effectively. The same is true of smart bombs used by the Air Force and Navy. Seeing how important orbital systems have become to the joint force, Russia and China are developing diverse means for destroying or degrading key space systems in wartime.
The Trump Administration has launched a major effort to increase the resilience of U.S. space assets, which includes making orbital capabilities more survivable, protecting ground systems, and rendering downlinks/uplinks harder to jam or intercept. Much of the new money is going to secret projects such as sophisticated sensor arrays, but the organizational manifestations of increased emphasis on space are easy to see: a sixth branch of the military called the Space Force, a unified command, a dedicated Space Development Agency, and other bureaucratic constructs. President Trump has done more to elevate the priority of national security space activities than any other chief executive.
Pressing allies to do their part. President Trump has not been shy about telling allies they must do more to support collective security. That goes particularly for the European members of NATO, many of whom have stopped thinking rigorously about the military threat posed by Russia. For instance, Germany—one of the world’s biggest economies—spends less in a year on defense than Washington does in a month. The ability of NATO forces to deter or defeat Russian aggression is undermined by this lack of commitment.
Trump has correctly stated that the U.S. gets less from its alliances than overseas partners do even though it pays much more to keep those alliances viable. Some have said this makes him a neo-isolationist. However, the extensive funds provided by the administration for efforts such as the European Deterrence Initiative demonstrate that Trump’s main goal isn’t to withdraw from overseas, bu
Agreed. It's okay to joke occasionally, but those "jokes" must be chosen with care. Two of Reagan's were "I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent's youth and inexperience" and "We begin bombing in 5 minutes."
Note that the first was in a debate and the second was off the record. If Reagan had said the latter on the record or at a rally, I'd be giving him as much shit as I am Trump....and Reagan's one of my heroes.
"Hatred is a failure of imagination" - Graham Greene, "The Power and the Glory"
Bookmarks