• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Does the Pentagon Understand What a Navy Is For?

Fledermaus said:
Incorrect.



According to you only illegals don't care about the Law.

And Unemployment Compensation laws are not repugnant to our supreme law of the land.

You are incapable of showing they are.



Standard danielpalos babble.



There is no "unequal protection of the laws" in the unemployment Compensation law.
Click to expand...

I just told you there were. I am Right even though I am on the left.
 
Rogue Valley said:
Every military branch has a say over naval preparedness and forward planning? What in Hell are they doing in the Pentagon?
Click to expand...

This should be a large "Well duh!" as far as I am concerned.

While most of the troops themselves are flown to overseas locations, how do you think their equipment gets there? Their fuel, food, and other supplies?

Trust me, it ain't sent by plane. It is sent by ships, which by the way the Navy controls. They have all those ROROs to primarily support the Army. And having the ships to support such operations has always been a key part of the entire US Defense program. I myself have had to drive to ports in order to pick up equipment arriving from the US for use at overseas bases.

And it makes absolutely no sense to fly things like fuel overseas. That is why we use bulk tankers to move it where it is needed.
 
China is going to totally control the South China Sea and there is nothing we or anyone else can do to stop it. Pretending otherwise is just profit-fantasies of the war industries.
 
joko104 said:
China is going to totally control the South China Sea and there is nothing we or anyone else can do to stop it. Pretending otherwise is just profit-fantasies of the war industries.
Click to expand...

What makes you say that?
 
Dayton3 said:
What makes you say that?
Click to expand...

Because Marx said so, I guess. The dialectic will prevail!

Of course, most do not realize that the People's Liberation Army Navy is largely a joke. Even to China it is a joke, they have never really given a damn about their Navy. It is all for show really. They can not even operate at any kind of level above a glorified coast guard.
 
Oozlefinch said:
Because Marx said so, I guess. The dialectic will prevail!

Of course, most do not realize that the People's Liberation Army Navy is largely a joke. Even to China it is a joke, they have never really given a damn about their Navy. It is all for show really. They can not even operate at any kind of level above a glorified coast guard.
Click to expand...

You have a strange sense of humor :)
 
one thing for sure America is using it's navy for international piracy, America is breaking International law by seizing 4 Iranian tankers heading for Venezuela and the sanctions imposed on several other countries is also against International law .... America seems to think it's above the law and that America is the UN, the sanctions against Nordstream 2 are also against International law
 
Godric1970 said:
one thing for sure America is using it's navy for international piracy, America is breaking International law by seizing 4 Iranian tankers heading for Venezuela and the sanctions imposed on several other countries is also against International law .... America seems to think it's above the law and that America is the UN, the sanctions against Nordstream 2 are also against International law
Click to expand...

The U.S. is not bound by international law unless supporting legislation has been passed by Congress and signed by the president.

Look it up.
 
Dayton3 said:
The U.S. is not bound by international law unless supporting legislation has been passed by Congress and signed by the president.

Look it up.
Click to expand...

the rest of the world is not bound to America ... look it up ... you will end up with no allies only a handful of lapdogs even the people in those countries don't want American bases on there territory .... America is essentially a rogue and pirateer state
 
Rogue Valley said:
Does the Pentagon Understand What a Navy Is For?

Fleet-force planning has been seized by a Joint Staff and Defense Secretary who put budget-slicing before strategy.

defense-large.jpg




Every military branch has a say over naval preparedness and forward planning? What in Hell are they doing in the Pentagon?
Click to expand...

the pentagon has been messed up for a while
 
Wow, it sure is hard to keep a thread on topic!

As a former operations planner, I will say this: All branches should have a say on elements of another service's operations that affect them, but each branch's strategic role is fundamentally different. I was an Army planner, through and through, so, even though I have worked in Joint environments, my depth of knowledge of Navy operations is a couple of inches deep, yet even I know that Naval Operations are much, much broader than simply moving Army troops and supplies around. Naval power is an important - and separate - element of the National Defense Strategy.

Navies are, strategically, a force projection platform. Naval operations include, especially, "freedom of the seas" operations, which are of vital national interest. They also include "Treaty Enforcement" operations - which Godric addressed (but largely incorrectly). It is one of the trickiest aspects of international law, but it is not without legal basis or justification. Nor is it correct to call the Chinese Navy a joke. As an international strategic force, it is nascent, but it is far from irrelevant. The PLAN has been conducting anti-piracy operations essentially continuously since 2008 in the Gulf of Aden, and has strategic port operations in Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Iran. In addition, China has extensive experience and resources in international shipping operations.

There had been a lull, following WWII, in the external projection of force from a Chinese Navy (People's Liberation Army Navy or PLAN - isn't that an oxymoron), but that is the past.
Until the late 1980s, the PLAN was largely a riverine and littoral force (brown-water navy). However, by the 1990s, following the fall of the Soviet Union and a shift towards a more forward-oriented foreign and security policy, the leaders of the Chinese military were freed from worrying over land border disputes. Having traditionally been subordinated to the PLA Ground Force, PLAN leaders were able to advocate for a renewed attention towards the seas.

In 2008, China confirmed plans to operate a small fleet of aircraft carriers in the near future, but for the purpose of regional defence as opposed to "global reach".[7] By 2009, with the advancements in naval techonology, the PLAN was recognized to have reached the status of a green-water navy.[8] Chinese military officials have also outlined plans to operate in the first and second island chains, and are working towards blue water capability.[9] Chinese strategists term the development of the PLAN from a green-water navy into "a regional blue-water defensive and offensive navy."[10] The People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) plans to have at least 6 aircraft carriers by 2035.[11][12]
Click to expand...
(Wikipedia, citing US Naval planners and resources).

[There are, essentially, 3 "tiers" of naval operations, colloquially referred to as "Brown-water" which consists of internal waterways and littoral areas of the country (think Coast Guard), "Green-Water" which expands to "regional control", and "Blue-Water" navies, which can project power anywhere in the world for extended periods of time.]
 
Last edited:
Godric1970 said:
the rest of the world is not bound to America ... look it up ... you will end up with no allies only a handful of lapdogs even the people in those countries don't want American bases on there territory .... America is essentially a rogue and pirateer state
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter. The U.S. is too big and too strong to ignore. Cooperation with the U.S. will always be a more attractive option than confrontation
 
Rogue Valley said:
Every military branch has a say over naval preparedness and forward planning? What in Hell are they doing in the Pentagon?
Click to expand...

No branch operates in a vacuum.

There is one pot of money from which the four primary branches are funded from. It makes sense that funding decisions are done as a holistic exercise.

I can't believe I'm defending anything in the Trump administration.
 
danielpalos said:
You have no excuses. Where is the question that elicits elucidation of any concept you may not fully understand?
Click to expand...

Fledermaus said:
Please explain the fallacy.

You stated only illegals don't care about the Law.

You have stated that you don't care about Unemployment Compensation law.

Therefore, by your logic, you are an illegal.
Click to expand...


Moderator's Warning:
This thread is not for you two to snipe back at one another back and forth. Return to the topic at hand.
 
Dayton3 said:
The U.S. is not bound by international law unless supporting legislation has been passed by Congress and signed by the president.

Look it up.
Click to expand...

If the US isn't bound to it why should any other nation bother?
The US can be sanctioned by the UN just like any country if they break international law.
 
Peter said:
If the US isn't bound to it why should any other nation bother?
The US can be sanctioned by the UN just like any country if they break international law.
Click to expand...

But they won't be. The U.S. can veto any Security Council resolution passed doing that.

Most "international laws and treaties" are what amount to "gentlemen's agreements".
 
Dayton3 said:
But they won't be. The U.S. can veto any Security Council resolution passed doing that.

Most "international laws and treaties" are what amount to "gentlemen's agreements".
Click to expand...

How does the US expect any other nation to take them seriously and follow international law if the US is somehow above that law?
 
Show me a time when Naval planning has not been full of politics? For nations with a blue water naval force there will always be contention about priorities that are quickly changing. For example: it wasn't until 1942 and after Pearl Harbor that the United States finally had to consider aircraft carriers to be capital ships. Prior to '42 there was much debate about the issue. After Pearl Harbor there was no longer any debate about it.

In the near future it will be hyper-sonic missles which will rule the seas... which doesn't depend on a navy anyway.
 
Peter said:
How does the US expect any other nation to take them seriously and follow international law if the US is somehow above that law?
Click to expand...

Because it is in their interest to follow an international system that serves the U.S. best.

You don't defy the neighborhood cop just because he steals donuts now and then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom