If Romney Wins, Does the U.S. Navy Expand?

[arp2041]

Defense News is running an interview between reporter Chris Cavas and former Secretary of the Navy John Lehman that’s well worth your time. Now a senior advisor to the Mitt Romney campaign, Lehman presided over the expansion of the U.S. Navy to almost 600 ships during the 1980s. The chief takeaway from the interview is a number: 350. That’s the number of ships that Romney & Co. believe should comprise the future fleet. The campaign has apparently embraced the vision put forward by a blue-ribbon panel that evaluated the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review, the Pentagon’s official view of the strategic environment and the best methods for coping with it. The QDR panel recommended fielding a 346-ship fleet. The navy’s goal stood at 313 ships from 2006 until earlier this year, when naval officials dialed the total back to “about 300.”

Two things to ponder about this. First, the fleet currently stands at 287 ships. A massive nuclear-powered aircraft carrier counts as one of those hulls; so does a dainty minesweeper. One ship is not like another. Which leads to the question: which 63 ships would the Romney team add to reach the target figure? The new administration would step up shipbuilding rates by about two-thirds, from nine to “approximately fifteen” new hulls per year. Some of Lehman’s observations are boilerplate, such as sustaining a fleet of eleven aircraft carriers and pressing ahead with destroyer construction. More intriguingly, he floats the idea of building a new class of guided-missile frigates to replace the workhorse Perry-class FFGs, which are going to their reward after three decades of service. That would reverse the trend toward substituting single-mission-at-a-time Littoral Combat Ships for multi-mission FFGs—and thereby attenuating the fleet’s overall combat strength. The LCS has its uses, as Lehman points out, but it is not a battle-force ship. LCS construction will continue should the White House change hands—but not as a substitute for higher-end combatants.

Second, and perhaps more importantly, how would the politics of a 20-plus-percent buildup of U.S. naval strength play out? Today’s strategic setting differs markedly from the early 1980s, when Secretary Lehman oversaw the Reagan buildup. Then, the United States confronted an overbearing adversary, the Soviet Union, with the “hollow” post-Vietnam military—a chronically overworked, undermanned, underfunded force. Under such duress, it was relatively easy to make the case for restoring U.S. military power. But how would a President Romney make his pitch? Is China, or Iran, a catalyst of Soviet proportions? If not, the electorate might see a reinvigorated, more expensive U.S. Navy as a wasting asset—never a healthy thing in a liberal society. If Romney wants to superintend a naval renaissance, he must convincingly explain America’s larger strategic purposes, and how a more muscular fleet will help the republic match purpose with power. That could be a challenge.


If Romney Wins, Does the U.S. Navy Expand? - The Naval Diplomat

 

[Icarus]

Under the present economic situation, I think such a decision will invite a severe backlash from the public who are already being affected by Social Security and Health Services cuts....

 

[arp2041]

Under the present economic situation, I think such a decision will invite a severe backlash from the public who are already being affected by Social Security and Health Services cuts....

Absolutely, these or all election talks, on the contrary i see USN actually decreasing in strength since it has already topped it's strength at the heights of cold-war in 1980s, with no enemy posing a serious challenge to the might of USN & saturated US economy finding the cost to maintain a formidable fleet unbearable, i can only predict a downward curve for USN. This is actually an opportunity for Asian powers like China & India to increase there naval strength & increase there influence at sea, a thing they have understood well & are working hard for it.

 

[EMERCOM]

USA will reduce exponentially.I am expecting great unrest in the future.

 

[Arzamas 16]

Absolutely, these or all election talks, on the contrary i see USN actually decreasing in strength since it has already topped it's strength at the heights of cold-war in 1980s, with no enemy posing a serious challenge to the might of USN & saturated US economy finding the cost to maintain a formidable fleet unbearable, i can only predict a downward curve for USN. This is actually an opportunity for Asian powers like China & India to increase there naval strength & increase there influence at sea, a thing they have understood well & are working hard for it.

LOL, never underestimate Republicans, Romney is even planing to cut Federal funding to PBS so he can fund his Military spending.

 

[Juice]

Under the present economic situation, I think such a decision will invite a severe backlash from the public who are already being affected by Social Security and Health Services cuts....

Which part of SS was cut?

 

[arp2041]

LOL, never underestimate Republicans, Romney is even planing to cut Federal funding to PBS so he can fund his Military spending.

Than they are just waiting for a disaster mate, what happened when Mr. Bush increased the military funding like never seen before in the post cold-war era US, US fought wars on two fronts - Iraq & Afghanistan & it's economy was shaking, remember 2008?? The great year which brought the entire world close to the great depression of 1929 & US' economy to it's knees, now if Mr. Romney wants to do a George W Bush, than only god can save America , I don't doubt if Mr. Romney can finance his ambitious military program or not, but than he has to cut other useful expenditures at a time when US economy has topped itself & it is finding it's tag of "sole global superpower" in danger.

 

[Nishan_101]

Its expanding and it will going to be.

 

[fatman17]

if Romney wins, the US defence budget will shoot to an all-time high of $951 Billion. even higher than the korean, vietnam wars - source CNBC

 

[AUz]

U.S Navy needs 'expansion' ? LOL! Are they gonna challenge themselves or what?

 

[AbuMuslim]

Actually they need a massive expansion of their fleet as the world becomes more multi-polar, they'll need to be able to confront more threats. The greatest threat at the moment is going to be Iran, which if it gains nuclear weapons will need to be faced down and if necessary blockaded.

 

[arp2041]

U.S Navy needs 'expansion' ? LOL! Are they gonna challenge themselves or what?

The greed for power is enough to drive a country towards increasing militarization, if there are no enemies than they will find one. US is the sole superpower in the world, & it has been so b'coz of it's naval might which rules all oceans, if there is a threat (even slightest) to that naval might than US can no longer claim to be a superpower (remember in around 1900 GB had the greatest naval fleet, with it's diminishing strength it's naval fleet also got depleted with time. US, though under pressure from the Asian rising powers like China & India, will still want to be the sole superpower & for it a large naval fleet is a must, as history has shown us that the country who has controlled the sea has in turn controlled the land.

 

[Jango]

Romney also wants to continue with the Raptor program, and impose US more on the world.

Mere election talk IMO, navy expansion, Raptor program etc etc.

 

[Alphacharlie]

Than they are just waiting for a disaster mate, what happened when Mr. Bush increased the military funding like never seen before in the post cold-war era US, US fought wars on two fronts - Iraq & Afghanistan & it's economy was shaking, remember 2008?? The great year which brought the entire world close to the great depression of 1929 & US' economy to it's knees, now if Mr. Romney wants to do a George W Bush, than only god can save America , I don't doubt if Mr. Romney can finance his ambitious military program or not, but than he has to cut other useful expenditures at a time when US economy has topped itself & it is finding it's tag of "sole global superpower" in danger.

Very sensible assertion. But Yanks needs to make presence felt in Indian Ocean. Diego Gracia lease ending in 3 years and Chinese Intrusions - This makes an Apt case for US to increase spending. Do remember, when Money is pumped to Defense Industry in makes the Economy move faster. Afghanistan needs permanent US Presence.

Cases like cutting Outsourcing is Just Tip of the Iceberg more CONCRETE Steps need to be taken...Things like SS expenses are a Liability, no one will dare to Touch. Increase in defense spending makes the Global economy move as well. Go Mr Romney Go for the Kill. Remember 80s when Ronald Regan used to Rule THE MASSES.

Mr. Obama has made a mark being 1st Afro American President, apart from Osama elimination he HASNOT done any thing substantial to be re-elected

 

[Imran Khan]

its means US debit will go 200% of GDP