"Mr.Luddite" says...

I agree, it's time we got to hell out of the idea that we are the world
police.


"It's not rocket science.
Done. I've dealt with the national debt.
Implement it and consider the debt reduction goals in it sacrosanct."

So is this the solution to our national debt with you have dealt?

Mikek

In article , says...

"Mr.Luddite" says...

I agree, it's time we got to hell out of the idea that we are the world
police.


"It's not rocket science.
Done. I've dealt with the national debt.
Implement it and consider the debt reduction goals in it sacrosanct."

So is this the solution to our national debt with you have dealt?

Mikek

WTF does that drivel have to do with my statement to Luddite??

On 10/8/2013 3:24 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says...

"Mr.Luddite" says...

I agree, it's time we got to hell out of the idea that we are the world
police.


"It's not rocket science.
Done. I've dealt with the national debt.
Implement it and consider the debt reduction goals in it sacrosanct."

So is this the solution to our national debt with you have dealt?

Mikek

WTF does that drivel have to do with my statement to Luddite??


This is what you said,
"It's not rocket science.
Done. I've dealt with the national debt.
Implement it and consider the debt reduction goals in it sacrosanct."

So what is your solution to spending $3.5 trillion when you only have
$2.2 trillion of income?
Mikek

"amdx" wrote in message ...


"Mr.Luddite" says...

I agree, it's time we got to hell out of the idea that we are the
world
police.


"It's not rocket science.
Done. I've dealt with the national debt.
Implement it and consider the debt reduction goals in it sacrosanct."

So is this the solution to our national debt with you have dealt?

Mikek

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

Not sure to whom you addressed your question Mikek, but my point was
that our Navy is structured for the Cold War Era when bigger and
badder was important. That's not the case anymore.

We could cut the size of our Naval battle groups in half and still be
5 times the size of any other Navy in the world. Hank's idea of
giving a few away to trusted allies is an excellent idea. Maintains
the original overall strength and shares the cost of operating and
maintaining the fleets.

One of the new carriers currently under construction is the USS Gerald
R. Ford (CVN-78). Total cost, including research and development is
currently projected to be over $14 billion. When commissioned it
will have a *daily* operating cost of $7 million. Might not pay off
the national debt, but it's money we really don't need to spend.
There are two more scheduled after the Ford. Meanwhile, the last of
the Nimitz class aircraft carriers (which the Ford class replaces)
won't be taken out of service until 2058.

We donate about 25 percent of ex-Navy destroyers and cruisers to
allies now, rather than scrap them. Why not give away a few battle
groups?

On 10/8/2013 5:07 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


"amdx" wrote in message ...


"Mr.Luddite" says...

I agree, it's time we got to hell out of the idea that we are the world
police.


"It's not rocket science.
Done. I've dealt with the national debt.
Implement it and consider the debt reduction goals in it sacrosanct."

So is this the solution to our national debt with you have dealt?

Mikek

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

Not sure to whom you addressed your question Mikek, but my point was
that our Navy is structured for the Cold War Era when bigger and badder
was important. That's not the case anymore.

We could cut the size of our Naval battle groups in half and still be 5
times the size of any other Navy in the world. Hank's idea of giving a
few away to trusted allies is an excellent idea. Maintains the original
overall strength and shares the cost of operating and maintaining the
fleets.

One of the new carriers currently under construction is the USS Gerald
R. Ford (CVN-78). Total cost, including research and development is
currently projected to be over $14 billion. When commissioned it will
have a *daily* operating cost of $7 million. Might not pay off the
national debt, but it's money we really don't need to spend. There are
two more scheduled after the Ford. Meanwhile, the last of the Nimitz
class aircraft carriers (which the Ford class replaces) won't be taken
out of service until 2058.

We donate about 25 percent of ex-Navy destroyers and cruisers to allies
now, rather than scrap them. Why not give away a few battle groups?


My followup was to iboater.

I get you want cut military spending. I do think other nations should
pick up some of the tab. I don't know how many carriers we can get rid
of, I think it has lot to do with whether we have enough ICBM's that
are accurate and can reach anywhere. A carrier carries about 80 aircraft
with multiple bombs. I don't have the knowledge to tell anyone how many
carriers we need and I'm sure those that make the decisions have some
saying the world has changed.
I have some isolationism in me.
Mikek

"amdx" wrote in message ...

On 10/8/2013 5:07 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:


"amdx" wrote in message ...


"Mr.Luddite" says...

I agree, it's time we got to hell out of the idea that we are the
world
police.


"It's not rocket science.
Done. I've dealt with the national debt.
Implement it and consider the debt reduction goals in it
sacrosanct."

So is this the solution to our national debt with you have dealt?

Mikek

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

Not sure to whom you addressed your question Mikek, but my point
was
that our Navy is structured for the Cold War Era when bigger and
badder
was important. That's not the case anymore.

We could cut the size of our Naval battle groups in half and still
be 5
times the size of any other Navy in the world. Hank's idea of
giving a
few away to trusted allies is an excellent idea. Maintains the
original
overall strength and shares the cost of operating and maintaining
the
fleets.

One of the new carriers currently under construction is the USS
Gerald
R. Ford (CVN-78). Total cost, including research and development
is
currently projected to be over $14 billion. When commissioned it
will
have a *daily* operating cost of $7 million. Might not pay off
the
national debt, but it's money we really don't need to spend. There
are
two more scheduled after the Ford. Meanwhile, the last of the
Nimitz
class aircraft carriers (which the Ford class replaces) won't be
taken
out of service until 2058.

We donate about 25 percent of ex-Navy destroyers and cruisers to
allies
now, rather than scrap them. Why not give away a few battle groups?


My followup was to iboater.

I get you want cut military spending. I do think other nations
should
pick up some of the tab. I don't know how many carriers we can get rid
of, I think it has lot to do with whether we have enough ICBM's that
are accurate and can reach anywhere. A carrier carries about 80
aircraft
with multiple bombs. I don't have the knowledge to tell anyone how
many
carriers we need and I'm sure those that make the decisions have some
saying the world has changed.
I have some isolationism in me.
Mikek

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

I don't think Iboater was responsible for the quote you responded to.
Maybe that's the reason for the confusion.

As to firepower on a modern aircraft carrier, I can give you a rough
idea. One Nimitz class carrier has more firepower than our entire
Pacific fleet had in WWII.

One Nimitz class carrier has greater air power than 70 percent of all
other nation's entire air forces.