The fact that the American public does not care about Ukraine very much may be taken as a good sign for the neocons that the media has managed public opinion so well that Americans don't really care if we print a little extra money to send to Ukraine.
I think many more Americans would care if they knew (if the media reported) how many billions have actually been spent by "our" government on the Ukraine. I also think more would care if they were able to find the Ukraine on a map and had a basic understanding of the history of that region and the relationship between Ukraine and Russia. I think many, many more would care if they understood how a likely majority of Congress supports and seeks our direct participation in a war with nuclear powers.
None of this is funny but I actually laughed when the Russian commentator suggested that the Ukraine is a primary subject of discourse Americans are having. Nobody I know is discussing Ukraine. There is not enough knowledge about it plus people are caught up in the other problems of day to day life like keeping their jobs, buying gas, and feeding their families during Bidenflation.
Within the next six months, the United States Navy may need to decide whether to arm itself or Ukraine due to a reported weapons shortage.
The comment was made Wednesday by Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro to a group of reporters on the sidelines of the 2023 Surface Navy Association National Symposium in Arlington, Virginia, Defense One editor Marcus Weisberger reported.
Weisberger tweeted that although the bulk of American weapons given to Ukraine are land weapons and not naval weapons, Del Toro’s concerns are shared by others.
Here's a great article from the Asia Times about the sad condition of the US Navy at present. The author is a former naval secretary and US navy mariner, so he doesn't go into the more controversial reasons behind the malaise such as the vaccine mandates and the Woke/gender policies that put so many off staying in or joining up. Nevertheless, a good read.
"The US started a massive naval rearmament effort in 1938, long before Pearl Harbor. FDR had to contend with isolationist sentiment, but saw the real world for what it was, a dangerous place. Had he waited, we would have lost WW II. And Congress voted the money. As I argue in my National Interest article, we cannot wait today either to meet a new Asian threat. ..."
With regard to the US military and the Navy in particular, I have come to the painful conclusion that I can no longer recommend to any young man (or woman) that going in to the service for a tour or more is a good idea.
One colleague wrote to me, "you know, for the entire time of our Navy careers and since, the USN has been in a steady decline," which I guess is true in the main, aside from a few years of the Reagan/Lehman era, which was quickly reversed.
It is not just the failure to build the necessary platforms and systems, it is also an abject leadership failure, and the ever-increasing emphasis on woke-ism.
if I have understood correctly some recent tweets by Will Schryver, then surface naval vessels are unlikely to survive long in a great powers war. Hypersonic missiles, nuclear missiles or even conventional missiles with conventional warheads launched en masse would evade or overwhelm the anti missiles defenses of a carrier group.
That's my only critique of the Asia Times article. It mentions the new class of aircraft carriers coming online, and the long-awaited arrival of the F-35 as if these are positive events. They are not. They are white elephants that will further delay any turn around in the Navy's fortunes.
Many are talking about putting US boots on the ground in Ukraine if the Z regime starts to go belly up. My question has always been "What US forces?" The US is greatly over-extended around the world and is having severe recruitment problems. And this is without taking into account the large amount of time and logistical effort it would take to get GIs actually into Ukraine and ready to fight. The same applies to the other Nato forces. It's as if the whole Western military establishment is carrying out a gigantic car boot sale.
Isn’t there a “thing” in our constitution about going to war? Something about the president going to congress and asking for a declaration of war? Doesn’t that happen before there are “boots on the ground”? But then I’m just a naive old patriotic army vet.
The fact that the American public does not care about Ukraine very much may be taken as a good sign for the neocons that the media has managed public opinion so well that Americans don't really care if we print a little extra money to send to Ukraine.
I think many more Americans would care if they knew (if the media reported) how many billions have actually been spent by "our" government on the Ukraine. I also think more would care if they were able to find the Ukraine on a map and had a basic understanding of the history of that region and the relationship between Ukraine and Russia. I think many, many more would care if they understood how a likely majority of Congress supports and seeks our direct participation in a war with nuclear powers.
None of this is funny but I actually laughed when the Russian commentator suggested that the Ukraine is a primary subject of discourse Americans are having. Nobody I know is discussing Ukraine. There is not enough knowledge about it plus people are caught up in the other problems of day to day life like keeping their jobs, buying gas, and feeding their families during Bidenflation.
That is Luongo's view. What will need to be overcome is the WEF trolls running our politics, bent on destroying the country.
Major markets already in place, transportation and communication hub?
Article link:
https://www.indianpunchline.com/bidens-existential-angst-in-ukraine/
Within the next six months, the United States Navy may need to decide whether to arm itself or Ukraine due to a reported weapons shortage.
The comment was made Wednesday by Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro to a group of reporters on the sidelines of the 2023 Surface Navy Association National Symposium in Arlington, Virginia, Defense One editor Marcus Weisberger reported.
Weisberger tweeted that although the bulk of American weapons given to Ukraine are land weapons and not naval weapons, Del Toro’s concerns are shared by others.
Here's a great article from the Asia Times about the sad condition of the US Navy at present. The author is a former naval secretary and US navy mariner, so he doesn't go into the more controversial reasons behind the malaise such as the vaccine mandates and the Woke/gender policies that put so many off staying in or joining up. Nevertheless, a good read.
https://asiatimes.com/2023/01/a-looming-threat-and-a-hollow-force/
Maybe the new House will have greater interest ?
From a couple days ago, this from William R. Hawkins:
1938 Come Again: America Must Embrace Naval Rearmament
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/1938-come-again-america-must-embrace-naval-rearmament-206093
"The US started a massive naval rearmament effort in 1938, long before Pearl Harbor. FDR had to contend with isolationist sentiment, but saw the real world for what it was, a dangerous place. Had he waited, we would have lost WW II. And Congress voted the money. As I argue in my National Interest article, we cannot wait today either to meet a new Asian threat. ..."
This article should have been on the front page of the WSJ, or the NYT/WaPo, but instead was in Asia Times, by former DepUSecNav Seth Crospey:
US Navy: a looming threat and a hollow force
https://asiatimes.com/2023/01/a-looming-threat-and-a-hollow-force/
With regard to the US military and the Navy in particular, I have come to the painful conclusion that I can no longer recommend to any young man (or woman) that going in to the service for a tour or more is a good idea.
One colleague wrote to me, "you know, for the entire time of our Navy careers and since, the USN has been in a steady decline," which I guess is true in the main, aside from a few years of the Reagan/Lehman era, which was quickly reversed.
It is not just the failure to build the necessary platforms and systems, it is also an abject leadership failure, and the ever-increasing emphasis on woke-ism.
Oops! Sorry, Sandy. I referenced the article above and didn't realise you had already done so. Great minds think alike! :)
if I have understood correctly some recent tweets by Will Schryver, then surface naval vessels are unlikely to survive long in a great powers war. Hypersonic missiles, nuclear missiles or even conventional missiles with conventional warheads launched en masse would evade or overwhelm the anti missiles defenses of a carrier group.
That's my only critique of the Asia Times article. It mentions the new class of aircraft carriers coming online, and the long-awaited arrival of the F-35 as if these are positive events. They are not. They are white elephants that will further delay any turn around in the Navy's fortunes.
I think that is a fair statement.
More like game over. Carrier groups will go the way of the cavalry.
Many are talking about putting US boots on the ground in Ukraine if the Z regime starts to go belly up. My question has always been "What US forces?" The US is greatly over-extended around the world and is having severe recruitment problems. And this is without taking into account the large amount of time and logistical effort it would take to get GIs actually into Ukraine and ready to fight. The same applies to the other Nato forces. It's as if the whole Western military establishment is carrying out a gigantic car boot sale.
Isn’t there a “thing” in our constitution about going to war? Something about the president going to congress and asking for a declaration of war? Doesn’t that happen before there are “boots on the ground”? But then I’m just a naive old patriotic army vet.
The Constitution? Hey, I remember that!