Winning

Why? Is there a magic number they're supposed to have?

>>33981702

Under Trump, yes.

>>33980168
what is the point they are not combat ships

>>33981727
>why have recovery vehicles if they cant rooty tooty killy krautys

>>33980168
They are more likely to see any action anyway...

>>33981711
Oh, I looked it up and he wants 350 ships plus 12 carriers. This is going to cost billions.
Why don't we commit to Mars or something instead.

>>33982061
US Navy is tiny + shrinking because their procurement setup is a total disaster

>>33982489
While this is true compared to the USN circa 1988 or even 1998, It should also be noted that by commissioned tonnage, the USN is larger than the next 7 or 8 largest navies combined. It also has more nuclear submarines than the rest of the world combined, about 10 times as many 10,000 ton class or larger non-aviation surface warfare ships as the rest of the world combined, and of course more tonnage in supercarriers than the entire next largest navy in the world alone.

It ain't exactly tiny. It just doesn't quite have enough to fill all the responsibilities asked of it.

>>33983431
comparing Navy to Navy is not exactly right, because in a war it'll be US Navy vs land based+naval forces of China or whoever

China has built a lot of ships in the last 5 years, their military budget will only increase from now on.

>>33983714
If you're looking at it that way, then you have to add in all the allied and USAF air bases in the region as well. There's nowhere in the world that the USN would fight alone in an existential fight.

That said, the rate at which China is building ships is STILL slower than the USN by commissioned tonnage per year. They've started very far behind, and are only falling further behind in absolute tonnage, not even counting capabilities and effectiveness. Currently, just facing them with equal tonnage, the USN would only require about 1/3 of it's order of battle. Once you add in the qualitative and quantitative advantage in SSNs and naval aviation, that figure gets even lower.

>>33981711
>>33982061
The USN wants 355 ships, take your shilling to less informed places.

>>33983789
China can build smaller ships to do the same job that would require bigger for the US
Since they will be on the defensive, rather than deploying thousands of miles away

Theres nothing that makes a 15,000 ton cruiser more lethal than a 5,000 ton frigate.

>>33983943

>China can build smaller ships to do the same job that would require bigger for the US

Because their men are smaller, so they can just kinda scale the stolen blueprints down to 7/8ths scale

>>33983840

Shilling? All I said was that Trump promised to build a navy of a particular size. Are you denying that's the case?

>>33983943
>Theres nothing that makes a 15,000 ton cruiser more lethal than a 5,000 ton frigate.
Aviation facilities - you're clearly forgetting what a potent and flexible weapon one, let alone two LAMPS III choppers are.
More VLS cells
Better, more sophisticated sensor and EW options
Better ASW equipement
Oh yeah, and AVIATION FACILITIES. Can't stress that enough.

That's just off the top of my head.

>>33983943
>Theres nothing that makes a 15,000 ton cruiser more lethal than a 5,000 ton frigate.
Why don't you try and fit more than 40 or so strike length Mk 41 VLS cells or their equivalent on a 5,000 ton frigate. Tell me how that goes. Meanwhile, a Tico has 122 and a Burke carries 96. There's a direct efficiency correlation between combat efficiency and displacement up to about 10ktons for conventionally powered SW combatants with current technology. There's a reason why China is currently building them that size now, in addition to the frigates.

FUCK TRUMP

1 navy ship can pay for 10000 college degrees

33984056
Lazy bait.

>>33980168
>>33981711
>>33982061

>Change happens in 2014
>Somehow this is Trump's doing

>>33984069
This. That moron is too busy trying to avoid obstruction of justice charges to do anything productive at this point. He Nixon'd even faster than Nixon did.

>>33981727
>what is the point they are not combat ships

So the President can claim that he increased the number of combat vessels and retards will believe him.

>>33984056
but navy ships are cooler

>>33984094
he's speedrunning Watergate

>>33984382
Time attack, Impeachment Stage!
GO!

>>33984333
This. Does no one remember that he claimed the F-35 price drops were his doing, when they were projected as far back as the 2010 project restructure? As much as he's an incompetent idiot, he does have a talent for looking busy and then claiming credit on the backs of others.

>>33983840
>MUH SHILLING
>REEEEE

>>33983962
underrated

>>33983714
Copy pasta as of mid-2016:
>Even if they make everything in the plan, they STILL won't commission more warship tonnage than the USN from now to 2025.
USN new build warships to be commissioned by 2025:
>3x Ford Class 300,000t
>3x America Class 134,913t
>3x Zumwalt Class 45,000t
>at least 14x Burke class 137,200t
>at least 10x Freedom and 10x Independence class 66,040t
>at least 16x Virginia class 126,400t
>3x San Antonio class 75,900t
And those are just the commissioned major combatants, not including the MSC or support hulls.
A total of 885,453 tons of commissioned warship at least by 2025, all of which are either currently under construction or currently on order. For reference, this is roughly 3/4 of the entire current PLAN commissioned displacement.

PLAN new build ships, if they completely meet all their 2025 plan:
>1x Type 001A 67,500t
>1x Type 002 no confirmed tonnage yet, 80,000t seems to be the concensus
>12x 055 about 156,000t (12,000-14,000t? is there a confirmed number on these yet?)
>23x 052D 172,500t
>1x 054A 4,053t
>24x 054B 97,272t
>2x 071 50,000t
>4x 072 160,000t
For a grand total of about 787,325t, and that's only if they are wildly successful and there are no issues with building the first in class ships of at least 5 brand new first-build designs in the next 9 years. Still almost 100,000t less than the rate at which the USN has been building and commissioning warships for years now.

So, no. Even if they're wildly successful, the Chinese are not even going to be gaining ground if everything goes beautifully with the 2025 plan.

>>33984094

It cracks me up that people unironically believe this. Every week my brainwashed coworker gloats about how new info this week means drumpf is done. He gets upset when I say "lol nah" and point to the last ten months he was wrong. At this point it's like watching a schizophrenic try to work out reality.

>>33985054
Just remember: it's never the crime, it's always the cover-up.

It took a good while for Nixon to get his just deserts as well. However, Nixoning or not, articles of impeachment or not (we'll see after the midterm elections on that), if he doesn't figure out how to stop blowing his own dick off he won't make it through his first term. He damn well won't get re-elected considering the minuscule amount of his promises he's actually followed through on.

>>33985054
Leaking intel to the Russians the same week you fired the guy investigating your possible ties to Russia is a pretty pretty big step over the line.

File: roaches.png (10KB, 645x773px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 645x773px

>tfw no space elevator

>>33984056
>1 navy ship can pay for 10000 college degrees
Well if it takes 10000 people with college degrees to make one navy ship, technically, your right,

>>33985158
Jesus Christ who has corroborated this bullshit story besides unnamed "officials." Literally no one in charge or with any authority has said this. In fact literally no one we even know definitely exists has said anything to do with this story, besides out right denying it of course.

>>33985260
Not even McMaster denied it completely, and he was in the room when it supposedly happened. If you actually watch the press conference, he was very, very specific in his wording of what information was not passed. He looked like someone gearing up to avoid an eventual pasting in a Congressional hearing to me.

>>33985288
>Not even McMaster denied it completely
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/05/16/trump-acknowledges-facts-shared-with-russian-envoys-during-white-house-meeting/?utm_term=.14085f362f7b

What did he mean by this.

>>33985260
When it comes to the Washington Post and the Trump administration, only one has an extensive record of playing fast and loose with the truth.

>>33985387
Basically, White House staffers directed CNN not to publish the location and means of intelligence gathered to dismantle an ISIS plot to get explosives onto civilian planes. Then a journalist gets contacted by several pissed off staffers later who tell him Trump turned around and spilled that very info directly to the Russians in a fucking White House meeting. While bragging like a child. McMasters, who was in the room at the time, has been very cagey about not revealing what type of information was actually passed on, but by the fact that he's being so careful about it we can only conclude that he's not completely comfortable with aspects of the situation and is in CYA mode.

If true, this not only risks immediate lives of assets in the field, but it also erodes our ability to use the same means in the future to both prevent terror attacks worldwide AND gather intel against other world powers, like, say, Russia.

Unless absolutely, unavoidably necessary, no never EVER reveal intel sources, methods or locations. This shit isn't even spook 101 it's spook pre-school. It's politician 101 and it should be completely beneath the notice of common sense for someone supposedly capable enough to be POTUS.

Fucking disgusting.

>>33985440
It was also another nation's asset that they shared with us. So they are going to be pissed off and have second thoughts about sharing with us in the future.

>>33985387
>>33985440
Oh, and all this is coming on top of the reports that he directly asked Comey, as the director of the fucking FBI, to lay off Flynn in his investigation before Flynn was eventually fired. For improper contact with, you guessed it, Russia again. That's direct obstruction of justice for those of you keeping score, which is classified as a high crime and misdemeanor. You know, one of those things Presidents get impeached over. In fact, that very charge made up the bulk of Nixon's impending charges.

Honestly, I'm beyond flabbergasted at the incompetence. Not even the morality or lack of patriotism, but the sheer incompetence of this shit. If you're going to blatantly break the fucking law, at least be halfway smart about it.

>>33985462
It bakes my noodle every day to think of the damage Trump is doing within the international intel and diplomacy communities. I wonder how far he's set back US interests at this point. If I were working in a US intel shop, I'd be thinking of new and interesting ways to blow my own brains out at this point.

>>33984434
Sounds like a lot of people in power honestly

>>33985427
If you think the WP hasn't played fast and loose with the truth than you're deluding yourself. The Trump admin has the fucking right to work with the Russians this ludicrous Russia-Trump "scandal" is a transparent attempt to legitimize the legally elected president of the United States. It's like implying the Russian reset made Obama a Russian agent. Absurd in its entirety. Now Trump said he'd work with the Russians on the ISIS issue and so he is.

>If true, this not only risks immediate lives of assets in the field, but it also erodes our ability to use the same means in the future to both prevent terror attacks worldwide AND gather intel against other world powers, like, say, Russia.

What the fuck are you thinking?!! How on earth is sharing info on ISIS endangering assets also working on the same problem. The people in Russia aren't in danger because this has nothing to do with them. The whole thing is yellow journalism from a press dying for a Cold War with hot Presses. Fuck that noise.

>>33985472
>For improper contact with, you guessed it, Russia again.
He was fired for lying to Pence. Take your narrative and stop trying to shove it down our throats, try your ass instead.

>>33985539
>He was fired for lying to Pence.
What a hilarious lampshade you've produced. Even so, tell us, what exactly was he lying to Pence about? Oh, right.

Also, how could he have been fired for lying to Pence when Yates and Obama directly warned Trump not to bring him in before the inauguration, the former in writing and the latter in conversation?

You can't get warned both by the acting AG and the outgoing president and then pretend like you didn't know.

>>33985440
>White House staffers directed CNN not to publish the location and means of intelligence gathered to dismantle an ISIS plot to get explosives onto civilian planes.

>Trump turned around and spilled that very info directly to the Russians

>CNN
>Russians
one of these is not like the other.

>>33985539
Just like how Comey was fired for botching the whole Clinton server thing, amirite?

>>33985566
Yup. One isn't running massive cyber intrusion operations worldwide, sending little green men into surrounding countries and annexing territory every few years, or directly squaring off with the US in an active combat zone on a regular basis. Which one do you think that is?

>>33985539
How are you even still buying the bullshit? How many of his promises has he actually followed through on? How long until you wake the fuck up and realize you done been had?

>>33985563
>You can't get warned both by the acting AG and the outgoing president and then pretend like you didn't know.
I doesn't matter what he lied about. That's the point. The issue was that he lied. He had as much a right to speak to them as anyone and it's pretty blatantly clear that no incriminating information was found. Nothing came of it but Comey decided fuck it, POTUS might have shit he might want to get done but I'd rather spend time investigating his administration. Of course Comey was going to get fired.

>>33985585
CNN out of Crimea!

>>33985585
You're blatantly conflating info on a counter terror OP with info on several other systems and institutions that weren't even discussed and you know it.

>>33985539
you can tell that this guy's breath smells like Trump's cock

>>33983970
he's just including the "why" aspect.
Sending a team of navy seals to kill a bearded turban man sounds crazy until you describe the "why" being he is a terrorist.
Trump just randomly promising X number of ships is one thing. The navy requesting and Trump agreeing to X number is another.

>>33984056
Are those degrees we give to foreigners every year or actual scholarships to actual U.S. citizens?

>>33985600
>I doesn't matter what he lied about. That's the point. The issue was that he lied.
How is this an issue for Flynn but not an issue for Trump at all? I'll wait. Help me understand, seriously. Because I just don't get it.

>He had as much a right to speak to them as anyone and it's pretty blatantly clear that no incriminating information was found.
They're still in the middle of the investigation, genius. Remember that Watergate unfolded over almost 2 entire years, and that situation was much, much clearer than this one.

>Nothing came of it but Comey decided fuck it, POTUS might have shit he might want to get done but I'd rather spend time investigating his administration. Of course Comey was going to get fired.
Read up on your post-1974 legal history, junior. FBI discretionary powers of investigation in the executive branch are absolute. Period.

>>33985585
Maybe the US should stop sending "moderate" rebels to overthrow a Russian ally, just so Saudi Arabia can finally get that oil pipeline they wanted.
Maybe, the USA should stop meddling into other nation's politics and elections, like wiretapping their elected leaders.
Maybe, the USA should stop condemning "war criminals" and "dictators" when they prop up their own, and even help put them on committees like UN's human rights counsel.

>>33985668
"and are you lynching negros?"
Jesus. Like fucking clockwork, the immediate whataboutism.

Why is it only vatniks that seem to defend Trump anymore?

File: IMG_4369.png (80KB, 272x199px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 272x199px

>>33984333
>2014
>Drumpfs did somthing and its dumb he is so dumb lolololol
Can't wait for summer to end. Please learn how the calendar works. You can only fail first grade so many times.please return to containment board.
>>>/bant/534173

>>33985054
At this point, I'm seriously wondering if they'll charge him with actual treason. Even at least espionage charges can carry the death penalty.

>>33980168
>In April 2017, OP was a massive faggot with no citations. But he still got replies anyways.[33980168]

>>33985675
It's a legitimate argument. They're two massive governments, there are different standards. There are times where even among rivals cooperation is necessary.

>>33985675
Who is defending Trump?
Everything he condemns Russia for, the US has done it in spades.
The USA funds terrorists, they have attacked nations without provocation, they prop up dictators that have caused more human suffering than any of the one the media condemns, they have spied and meddled in elections, including the ones held by its so called allies.
Why hate on Russia for playing ball, when the USA is more then willing to go up to bat?

>>33985718
>It's a legitimate argument.
It's also completely and totally irrelevant to the issue of whether Trump should be passing classified info on intel gathering methods to foreign powers with which we have an antagonistic relationship.

As ever, the whataboutism bullshit is only meant to distract and derail.

>>33985718
>>33985732
See? Look: >>33985728
There's literally a playbook for this bullshit. Vatniks run it religiously in nearly every fucking medium they're allowed to post in. Tedious as hell.

>>33985738
Watching /k/ screech about Trump and Russia is hilarious.
It's almost as much fun as watching the CIA fuck up some more in the Middle East.
Maybe next time, they will sick their terrorist dogs against a softer target, not a secular nation that has backing from a world power.

>>33985738
It used to be that everyone on k was either vatnik or atf. This board went to shit when pol became popular. Now we have hipsters who know jack shit about weapons and just talk politics while claiming it's weapon related. Not a single post on this thread has been about weapons, their capabilities, or how they are used. Mods please do your fucking jobs.

>>33985794
>loose argument
>M-MOOOOODS!

Who's a hipster snowflake special safe place needing motherfucker?

>>33985794
We are discussing how the USA is a country of power hungry assholes who use its military, state sponsored propaganda, and espionage to force its will upon other nations.
So I'm not sure how this is not /k/ related shit right now.

File: memo_for_retards.png (91KB, 663x688px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 663x688px

>>33985440
You are a moron pls stop posting

>>33985898
>You are a moron pls stop posting
The question is not whether he has authority to do so. The question is why in the name of Zues' lightning-greased asshole he would reveal intel gathering methods and sources to the fucking Russians. You never, ever reveal that shit, even to allies, if you can help it. THIS WHILE HE'S IN THE MIDDLE OF BEING INVESTIGATED FOR IMPROPER CONTACT WITH THE FUCKING RUSSIANS.

Stop trying to strawman it.

>>33985918
What did he reveal?

>>33985918
>THIS WHILE HE'S IN THE MIDDLE OF BEING INVESTIGATED FOR IMPROPER CONTACT WITH THE FUCKING RUSSIANS.
he shouldn't be

>>33985918
>he question is why in the name of Zues' lightning-greased asshole he would reveal intel gathering methods and sources to the fucking Russians. You never, ever reveal that shit, even to allies, if you can help it.
we don't even know what he said Jesus Christ. He by all means should tell things to the Russians that are relevant to the mission of destroying ISIS.

>>33985794
Why should the mods close this thread down when it encompasses everything about /k/ so beautifully.
A bunch of pissed off Americans who have to watch everyday, their nation's fuck ups in the Middle East get bigger and bigger.
While Russia takes care of business, and exterminate ISIS and the American sponsored FSA trash.
And the the media wonders why Putin is so popular in the USA?
Maybe, the population would love to see their nation actually protect an allied nation for once, and actual kill terrorist scum that their nation were not equipping.
Who knows, maybe North Korea and Iran will start sucking dick American dick and not keep trying to develop nuclear weapons after the millionth show of force.

>>33985939
We don't know, because it turns out that the Washington Post is better at protecting secrets in the name of national security than the president.

>>33985950
>we don't even know what he said Jesus Christ. He by all means should tell things to the Russians that are relevant to the mission of destroying ISIS.
Because they're so diligent about it in Syria, amirite? Because they've made so many commitments and devoted so many resources to hunting them down worldwide, amirite? They're clearly the people who need to know this shit. Clearly.

And it's clearly the Presiden's job to tell them. In the fucking Oval Office. In front of at least a dozen people. You know, instead of just handing the intel off through back channels, intel shop to intel shop, like EVERY OTHER SANE COUNTRY IN THE FUCKING WORLD.

>>33985950
>He by all means should tell things to the Russians that are relevant to the mission of destroying ISIS.

it's about time you laid off the kool-aid. collaborating to destroy ISIS is one thing; revealing the source of an ally's intel to the Kremlin is an entirely different matter

>>33985970
How do we know it happened then? Do we have any names, or is this just another "anonymous sorces" thing? Help me out here, I haven't been following this shitshow.

>>33985980
And even if it were on the level, why is the President passing this shit on personally in the oval office? It literally makes zero goddamn sense until you remember that our POTUS is literally 12 year old schoolyard braggart tier.

>>33985980
>revealing the source of an ally's intel to the Kremlin
No one has said this

>>33985986
my understanding is that multiple sources within the administration have confirmed the gist of the Post's story to multiple news outlets. obviously this is going to be done off the record when you have someone that unstable for a boss.

>>33985986
Yes it's just anonymous source thing. These posters are blowing hot air out of their asses.

>>33985999
literally everyone has said that

>>33985939
A Mossad asset, almost certainly HUMINT. Trump didn't directly spill the beans, but he ran his mouth enough that anyone with a brain can start to connect the dots and figure the source out.

Israel is freaking the fuck out right now because we betrayed their trust to one of the worst possible nations (the Russians have been courting the Iranians like mad) over what was essentially Trump trying to brag about how awesome he is because people tell him secrets.

>>33985986
Because several newspapers verified it with their own people and the Israelis are having a meltdown.

>>33986009
When your boss is making blatant threats to the former head of the FBI using fucking Twitter of all things, would you want your name on the fucking story?

>>33985999
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/16/world/middleeast/israel-trump-classified-intelligence-russia.html
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/trumps-disclosure-endangered-spy-inside-isis-israel-officials/story?id=47449304
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/05/16/trump-sharing-russia-chills-israeli-intelligence/101762992/

>inb4 f-fake news!

>>33984382
>>33984414
>>>/r/eddit

File: 1492079297815-1.jpg (85KB, 1024x771px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 1024x771px

>>33985623
You shills are out in full force today.

>>33986029
>>inb4 f-fake news!
yes fake news. anonymous sources everywhere. anon its the same yellow journalism that's been pushing for a cold war with Russia for the past five years.

>>33986010
What's he really gonna have said, though?
>We have agents on the ground in Syria spying on ISIS. We know they were planning to use laptops to blow up planes.
It's not like the dude is actually running these opperations, what the fuck is he gonna know? Even if he said something that narrowed it down to like 1000 people, so what? Is Russia gonna turn around and tell ISIS?

This is just Russiaphobia and an attempt to stir shit to draw up enough public support for an impeachment hearing because he isn't the one they wanted to win. Seriously, this isn't the fucking 80s, grandpa. Let it go. We're not fighting your shitty fights for you.

You are the one who comes off looking like the bad guy, not them.

>>33986029
>sources say
>anonymous sources
>our sources (who wish to remain unnamed)
Kys shillfag

>>33983431
An interesting phenomena surrounding the navy: if you ask any admiral what defense spending ought to go towards every single one of them will say "more ships." Oddly enough the airforce only ever seems to say "more planes." Army will inevitably tell you they dont have enough tanks or artillery.

Marines? "Hey can we have a new rifle?"

t. Butthurt former Marine

We had the defense secretary do some kinda town hall meeting type deal so he could ask real grunts what they wanted.
>so whats your input?
>better rifles!
>blank look on his face for a moment
>"ANYHOW, the USMC is getting some ne F-35's, arent you guys excited about that?"
>uhhhh..... no. We carry rifles. We want better ones.
>"and it does CAS really well!"
>RIFLES!
>"did I mention it has really good VTOL capability?"
>fuck you guy!!!!
>"which is really important because the harrier is our only VTOL jet and its outdated!"

No shit. Im exaggerating the dialog a bit for humor-sake becuse the 2 hour long version is more boring, but yup. Infantry didnt need new rifles cuz "mumble mumble something something F-35"

>>33984056
Yeah, because that's exactly what we need - 10,000 more lukewarm-IQ people who get useless liberal arts or sociology degrees instead of making themselves useful by learning to be plumbers, carpenters, or electricians.

>>33986058
Israel is scared their connection to Isis is compromised, and that when Syrian authorities finds him, he will spill the beans of how much support Israel is giving to the terrorists and other anti-Assad groups trying to overthrow the government.
Hopefully, he is rounded up, and shown on live television when he reveals how much Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the USA had a hand in creating unrest in Syria and the Middle East as a whole.
/k/ will go /pol/ and scream about fake news if it airs on RT.

>>33986049
Sorry if I triggered you. You might want to head back to your safe space on /pol/.

>>33986057
Someone didn't bother to learn anything in school. You know what broke Watergate? Oh. That's right. An anonymous source.

>>33986107
No. There is an agenda directed at 4chan and you're very transparently part of it. Trump won, we have the supreme court, you won't be able to ban guns, kys shillary cunt.

>>33986129
What im hearing is "im not eloquent or interesting enough to get (you)s on /pol/ so I shitpost politics on /k/"

>>33986129
You know one time a singer on the subway turned out to be lady gaga in disguise. Guess they all are then right. But if you can fill in an empty space with what you want to believe I guess it works for you.

>>33986142
>>33986144
Feel free to point out how many of the really big political scandals in the last 60 years first reported by the press, not including public fuckups like dick pics, didn't start with an anonymous source. Now count how many did.

Then kindly go fuck yourself with a cactus sideways.

>>33986153
Read the rules, then fuck off back to the board where your topic is relevant. Were here to discuss ships.

File: 1458436128282.png (402KB, 452x510px) Image search: [Google]

402KB, 452x510px

>>33986142
>/pol/
>eloquent
>interesting
The delusion is real.

>>33986153
Who gives a shit? The mainstream press has no credibility left whatsoever. I wouldn't believe those dickheads if they told me it was cold in Fairbanks at Christmas. Oh, and speaking of political scandals, remember when Matt Drudge singlehandedly created internet-era citizen journalism by reporting on the Monica Lewinsky story after Newsweek spiked it because the press were the only people in the world who sucked Bill Clinton's dick more enthusiastically than Monica did? I do.

>>33986164
Shhhhhh. Im being insulting whilst simultaneously trying to use reverse psychology to banish the beast to where it belongs!

>>33986071
Trump literally admitted it on tuesday morning on fucking Twitter.

>>33985158
You really need to read up on the powers of the president and the situation before you spout your garbage.

>>33986164
>What im hearing is "im not eloquent or interesting enough to get (you)s on /pol/
He is clearly saying that he's not even good enough for /pol/ are you stupid?

>>33986172
Except they were absolutely right. Trump immediately turned around and admitted it on Twitter.

Donald J. TrumpVerified account @realDonaldTrump 21h21 hours ago
>As President I wanted to share with Russia (at an openly scheduled W.H. meeting) which I have the absolute right to do, facts pertaining....
>...to terrorism and airline flight safety. Humanitarian reasons, plus I want Russia to greatly step up their fight against ISIS & terrorism.

>>33986172
>Oh, and speaking of political scandals, remember when Matt Drudge singlehandedly created internet-era citizen journalism by reporting on the Monica Lewinsky story after Newsweek spiked it because the press were the only people in the world who sucked Bill Clinton's dick more enthusiastically than Monica did? I do.
Mike. Go to bed. You're drunk.

>>33981727

>I am the president and I say I want 500 ships in the Navy!

Sir yes sir! We will need a lot of money to do that sir!

>We are Congress, you will get exactly zero extra dollars to buy more ships

Mr. President sir! We cannot increase the fleet size, we have no extra money!

>I don't care make it happen! That's an order!

Thus the admirals "made it happen".

The military isn't about pointing out how stupid something is. You just have to make it happen. Thus we get retarded outcomes like this one.

>>33986172
SO ANYWAYS.

A good number of naval officers are just bureucrats who probably are just trying to avoid getting in trouble for missing dealines by redesignating vessels as combat ships.

I mean seriously, the zumwalt class was a total disaster, only a tiny fraction of the number originally intended were built. They cant even fulfill their original mission. They were SUPPOSED to be able to sneak up all sneaky like to coastal defenses and be capable of long range fire inland. The long range rocket assisted rounds were too expensive to field effectivley and the compromise they settled on is only half the range required to make the tactic the ship was designed for impossible.

Plus they catch on fire. I hate to say it, but latley it seems like the navy is the last group one ought to trust to run the navy.

>>33986175
>>33986178
>>33986184
>>33986188
Stop. Feeding. The. Faggot.

>>33986175
Admitted what? That he told the Russians that ISIS has started using bombs hidden in laptops? Why the fuck *wouldn't* we tell the Russians that, especially after somebody blew up a Russian airliner over Egypt a couple years ago? I don't like civilian vacationers getting blown up in airliners, how about you? I think preventing that from happening again is a good thing, how about you? I'm fucking tired of this blind demented hatred of both Trump and Russia. Please fuck off back to Plebbit.

>>33986206
Jesus fucking christ people. Its one fagggot who is full of shit. Ignore it. The damage compulsive posters like you do to board culture is more cancerous than his off topic derailment.

Fucking go to /pol/ and start a thread to talk about this shit if the arguement is so important to you. Otherwise, quit enabling faggotry.

The doctor just told you you got ass-cancer and you are replying with an asbestos enema.

>>33986184
Oh, sorry, you're right. Trump should have let more civilians die in terror as the airliner they were flying in disintegrated in flames around them. How dare Trump do something to prevent that from happening? Clearly this is treason.

You are an indescribably shitty excuse for a human being. Do humanity a favor and set yourself on fire immediately.

>>33986164
You're right, it isn't either of those things with your kind around to shit it up. You probably even do it for free, don't you?

Let me guess, you're some fucking 105 IQ retard who goes to school on daddy's money. You're fairly well-off but you're still taking loans up the ass so you can get your psychology degree. You live in a hip, liberal area full of other "open-minded" young people, and you know it all because you go to school. You're a joke, buddy. You know, he's right: you aren't eloquent or interesting enough to make it on /pol/. You're mediocre. You can fit in with the shills, but when it comes to the actual people there, you're no match. Well you don't have your army of robots here to back you up and make you feel like you've won. You got nothing. Take your shit back to /pol/ where it belongs and stay there. That way you won't have to feel so threatened and alone.

>>33986107
>everyone I don't like is /pol/
Sorry shillfag, I'm here to stay.

>>33986226
>projecting harder than a drive-in theater

>>33986206
Shush now, don't you know the Russians are our enemy?
They shouldn't be bombing our trained terrorists when they are trying to overthrow their ally, and they shouldn't be backing evil nations like Iran, unlike us who support only good nations like Saudi Arabia, just look at how they are always looking out for their neighbor Yemen.

>>33982061
>Why don't we commit to Mars or something instead.
god you're dumb. Yes space travel is worth the trillions at this point. I do agree at a point it is needed. But now, it is not. Especially at the cost and risk. Go watch some more star trek you fucking wizard.

What sort of fucking retard would read washington post or new york times and think they are getting truth

>>33986649
I'll just leave this here:
>When we think of “Post-truth,” we think it’s something new. We think it’s something at campuses. We think it’s something irrelevant. Actually, what post-truth does is it paves the way for regime change. If we don’t have access to facts, we can’t trust each other. Without trust, there’s no law. Without law, there’s no democracy.
>So if you want to rip the heart out of a democracy directly, if you want to go right at it and kill it, what you do is you go after facts. And that is what modern authoritarians do.
>Step one: You lie yourself, all the time. Step two: You say it’s your opponents and the journalists who lie. Step three: Everyone looks around and says, “What is truth? There is no truth.”
>And then, resistance is impossible, and the game is over.

>>33985009
China still is deploying more combat vessels though.

A huge portion of that USA tonnage is THREE carriers (which are replacing three carriers, thus no real net gain).
In fact many of the USA ships are "replacement hulls" for a prior class.

This tonnage comparison is just as silly as the "Navy - Navy" comparison.

>>33983714 >>33983431 >>33982489

>>33987716
>A huge portion of that USA tonnage is THREE carriers (which are replacing three carriers, thus no real net gain).
>In fact many of the USA ships are "replacement hulls" for a prior class.
3 supercarriers and 16 nuclear attack boats. Both of these are massive force multipliers, and China has answers for neither. Their submarine technology may as well still be in the stone age and they're about 30 years away, at least, from a serious, professional CATOBAR carrier force.

If you want to talk about capabilities, then point by point the USN still looks like a giant pissing on a dwarf. Would it really suck for the dwarf to punch the giant in the nuts? Yeah. It would hurt. But that dwarf gonna go down either way.

>>33987716
>>33987771
>In fact many of the USA ships are "replacement hulls" for a prior class.
Also, this is kind of OK when you've got 84+ major surface combatants in the 10,000 ton class, and your opponents are only just now finally building ships which directly challenge them in gross capabilities if not actual combat efficiency.

>>33985440
>>33985472
It's like reading a transcript of Rachel Maddow.

>>33987771
>>33987800
Salty much?

Just pointed out that "Dwarf" China is growing it's Navy size, whereas "Giant" USA is just updating it's Navy, not growing.
Thus raw tonnage numbers mean dick all for the USA side as tonnage is being replaced, not added.

>>33987832
No, they aren't. The vast majority of Chinese combat vessels are little more than floating rust, less than 15% of their ships are modern frontline destroyers. You can't claim that us "replacement hulls" are a count against the US when that is exactly what China is doing with 85% of its destroyers and it's entire submarine fleet. At least the ships the US is replacing are still capable warfighting ships with modern equipment. The Chinese ships being replaced are not.

>>33987832
>whereas "Giant" USA is just updating it's Navy
Let's see...
>Ford class
>Virginia class
>Zumwalt class
>Independance class
>Freedom class
>Columbia class
>America class
>San Antonio class
Yup. America totally isn't building any new classes. Totally only building class updates.

Also, if your argument is that they're just "turning over tonnage", then you have to prove that China will actually manage to update and replace well over half its current tonnage while tripling it's total size any time in the near future. Because that's what it would take to achieve parity with the USN.

>>33983943
>Theres nothing that makes a 15,000 ton cruiser more lethal than a 5,000 ton frigate.
Idiot.

>>33985440

>trump says that the US needs to stop nigger warring with Russia
>actually makes efforts to cooperate after years of Obama actively pursuing a conflict via economic sanctions
>meanwhile the knowledge was purely to detect how the new laptop bombs were made and how they were planned to be inserted onto civilian planes
>WAAAAAAAAAAH TRUMP IS EVIL

So basically because CNN got told what was happening , they decided to follow the advice they got from the WH because it'd make Trump look bad and a Russian plant despite the files actually being 'leaked' to them.

I wouldn't be entirely shocked if Trump sent them the files himself with a psuedonym so he could abuse the situation for political support since CNN seems ENTIRELY focused on complaining on completely pointless stories like how Trump got an edited meal plan for his group dinner and how that's somehow bad for his press.

CNN has been fucking destroyed consistently since the election because they can't stump trump. This is despite him fucking up constantly and having massive gaping flaws that constantly get noticed by every other news network but they don't care because it's not actually news without an agenda.

Trump giving pointlessly classified documents that should be public knowledge to all nations to Russia, a potential future ally, isn't wrong. Those laptop plans and their creation methods should be given to every government in the world when they became confirmed to prevent pointless loss of life.

Keeping it to yourself just creates a disparity between international relationships and a pointless motion.

>>33985808

/k/ used to be worse than it is now. You are just a retard that never visited circlejer/k/ where the only active threads were ARfags and AKfags with the rest being dead.

>>33987926
>This is despite him fucking up constantly and having massive gaping flaws that constantly get noticed by every other news network but they don't care because it's not actually news without an agenda.
The fact that this is a serious, earnest statement apparently in support of the president of the United States pretty much says it all.

>>33987646
I don't know who you're quoting, but he hit it on the head.

>>33987988
can the president not fuck up now?

>>33987988
I can and have made it on every president.

Trump doing 'bad' things isn't any different from Obama distancing the US from the UK despite being best bros since Reagan all because his personal bias got forced between us or Clinton causing a banking crisis through retarded legal decisions.

Infact I'd say giving countries information that might prevent terror attacks on your soil and their soil as well as prevent innocent civilian casualties is entirely justified in being revealed since why the fuck would you classify it?

>>33987988
>Somewhat reasonable, centrist statement about the obvious grudge that the media and CNN have for Republicans and Trump in general
>REEEE FUCKING DRUMPFKIN

This is why you lost the election.

File: Houbei Class fast attack craft.jpg (58KB, 500x348px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 500x348px

>>33987886
Nimitz » Ford
Los Angeles » Virginia
Ticonderoga » Zummwalt (at least originally, now they seem to be test ships)
OHP » Independence & Freedom
Ohio » Columbia


REPLACEMENT Ships you dumb ape, I never said America wasn't making anything new, the new are replacing the old. No net gain in overall tonnage at sea once that process is complete.

Whereas China is building their first carriers, their first cruisers, their first ocean going frigates (instead of brown water coast guard duty ships).

They are growing their navy, the USN is upgrading.

>>33987857
The 54A/B is what's replacing the rust buckets, of which China did not have many of. Their even smaller craft are all being replaced by this (pic related) which are produced in absolutely nutty numbers. China's PLAN is growing, the USN is stable (but upgrading as old ships expire).

>>33988067
>>33988067
I think the real question right now is "Can the president get anything right?"

>>33988070
>Clinton causing a banking crisis through retarded legal decisions.
Protip: Glass-Steagall dismantling was begun in earnest under Reagan, continued under H.W., accelerated under Clinton and finally completed under W. So, yes, Clinton had a major hand in it. But so did every US president from 1980-2008.

>Infact I'd say giving countries information that might prevent terror attacks on your soil and their soil as well as prevent innocent civilian casualties is entirely justified in being revealed since why the fuck would you classify it?
Do you really have this poor an understanding of how the intelligence community works? Really?
First of all, you classify it so the bad actors don't know you know. That way you can scoop them all up before they know you're coming. You don't just stop it. You can't just defend. You have to stop it AND get the guys behind it, or eventually they're going to get lucky.
Secondly, yes, this info should be and is shared all over the world with trusted allies and the governments involved. However, this is almost always done through back channels. Again, the whole idea is to not let anyone know that you know until the job is done, if even then. The president almost never deals with intel exchanging at this level, and we all know the only reason Trump did is because his ego is out of control.
Thirdly, you never, ever reveal the who, what, why, where or how of where the intel came from, unless absolutely necessary. You attach a confidence number to it and pass it on, without betraying any sources. Again, this is part of why this shit is done intel shop to intel shop through back channels, so amateurs and braggarts (like Trump) don't accidentally give away way too much information and completely expose both a valuable intelligence pipeline and the life of the assets involved.

>>33988147
>They are growing their navy, the USN is upgrading.
Good. Now prove that even though the USN isn't gaininig much actual tonnage, their combat ability overall hasn't risen just as fast as the PLAN considering all the upgraded and new capabilities being brought online.

>>33988091
>Somewhat reasonable, centrist statement
Hahahahahahahahahaha

Also, the issue isn't which rah-rah bullshit party candidate you're cheering for. I was simply pointing out how ridiculous it is that we expect and excuse unending, massive incompetence from the highest office in the land. Shit, even Nixon and Carter were well educated, competent and effective in several important fields. What progress has Trump made? In anything?

>>33988191
Ford class carriers will have F-35C on board.
The America class will have F-35B on board.
Poof, there's your proof, there's more but I'm sure you have access to basic research tools.

>>33988241
Erm... Read the post again. I think you're proving my point for me. Unless you're a complete idiot RE: the F-35 and somehow believe it isn't a massive upgrade over legacy bugs and AV-8Bs if not a complete sea change.

>>33988147
>of which China did not have many of.

WEW LAD.

Type 53 still forms a big part of the frigates. Not to mention the metric fuckton of wasted tonnage on the type 51's, Russian imports, the early type 52s, all of the type 37s, and type 62's, the type 39's, the kilos, the type 35s, the type 91,92, and some 93s. This is ignoring landing ships and the like.

The vast majority of the PLAN is woefully obsolete.

>>33980168

It's embarrassing, but what can you do. The Navy would've been too small at that size without cheating anyway.

>>33988291
It has nothing to do with fleet size (the sourced links do not even mention this) and everything to do with distributed leathality.

The USN plans to put weapons on those ships and you can't put offensive weaponry on USNS ships.

>>33984069
Came here to post this

File: 1491843372673.png (15KB, 240x304px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 240x304px

Why not put some super basic armament on minesweepers and tugs?

Like, put SeaRAM on them and call it a day. ESSM and whatever radar is lying around if you wanna be fancy.

Then they're legitimately combat capable, and calling them combat ships actually makes sense.

Plus killing pirates and drug smugglers with RAM would make for some awesome liveleak

>>33988339

Distributed Lethality is just the USN playing catch-up with basic anti-ship capabilities that belong on surface combatants, but which it has ignored for decades. It's a necessary foundational upgrade for the fleet, not a substitute for more warships which are seriously needed.

>>33988448
Distributed leathality is all about air defense for the time being but can be used in an OCA role.

It has nothing to do with anti ship capabilities. The anti ship arm of the USN is still planned to be airplanes and subs.

>>33988448
While it's true that more major combatant hulls are needed, to say that USN anti-ship capabilities were lacking is somewhat misleading.

The difference is simple that the USN focused on a completely different, much more effective set of tools - SSNs (attack subs) and naval aviation. For instance, see pic related. Just with naval aviation the force multiplication is insane compared to ship-mounted weapons. Add in the USN's dominating advantage in SSN hulls and technology, and there's an absolute certainty that they can win any stand up fight against the next three largest navies in the world if necessary.

Distributed lethality is simply the gravy on all the awesomeness. Worth the price of the ticket, but not the primary attraction.

File: Carriers VS SUW.png (72KB, 937x686px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 937x686px

>>33988448
>>33988510
forgot pic

>>33988491

The essence of DL is anti-ship capabilities.

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-us-navy-just-gave-us-the-inside-scoop-the-distributed-18185

>>33988510
>>33988521

I understand and agree that the USN maintains a qualitative functional edge over adversaries in anti-ship warfare due to doctrinal emphasis and force structure. As to whether or not it would fare as well as you suggest in all-out war, I'm hesitant to say, given the readiness-level of naval aviation alone. Of course, the paucity of available surface combatants exacerbates that problem.

>>33988630
>I understand and agree that the USN maintains a qualitative functional edge over adversaries in anti-ship warfare due to doctrinal emphasis and force structure. As to whether or not it would fare as well as you suggest in all-out war, I'm hesitant to say, given the readiness-level of naval aviation alone. Of course, the paucity of available surface combatants exacerbates that problem.
Well, readiness could always be higher. Especially now when there are so many aviation platforms just barely hanging on until the upgrades/replacements come online.

However, I would challenge you to not be so pessimistic. Consider what, for instance, the Russian Navy's readiness standard is, or current Chinese training and doctrine standards are. While we can always be better, and there are definite areas for improvement, I really don't think we're currently inadequate to answer any conceivable conventional naval conflict.

Obviously we need more hulls to meet all our responsibilities, reduce maintenance and refit strain and increase fleet hull life by decreasing operational tempo, but on a comparative basis we're still king shit in the turd bin.

>>33988630
>Of course, the paucity of available surface combatants exacerbates that problem.
I'm not sure I'd call 10 supercarriers, 9 LHD/LHAs, 84 Ticos/Burkes and 8 LCS a paucity. Especially when you throw in both the build rate on Burkes and LCS hulls and the insane, god-tier advantage in SSNs.

>>33988147
>Ohio » Columbia
Isn't it also
>Ohio SSBN » Ohio SSGN

>>33988708
>the build rate on Burkes

oh yay two year build rate that's supposed to be impressive?

>and LCS hulls

you mean the ships that keep breaking down and suffering power failures?

>>33989130
>two a year

You mean four or five? Or did you count end of line production as what is done normally, you retard.

>>33989130
>oh yay two year build rate that's supposed to be impressive?
Aside from China's so far unsubstantiated goals, feel free to point out who else in the world is shitting out (commissioning) 3-4 10kton class top notch surface combatants per year starting in 2017, in addition to everything else the USN is building.

>>33989202
remember back in 1945 when the usn commissioned eight destroyers a day

>>33984069
As OP, I'm laughing profusely at how retarded you guys are responding to my bait thread.

Although what's even funnier is that my bait is factual.

>>33989269
Remember back in 1945, when the US was spending 41.7% of GDP on defense? As in 12.64 times as much in % of GDP compared to now? Congratulations. You've just pointed out that an economy almost fully geared up to total war footing produced a lot.

Also, they didn't average 8 destroyers a day, not even in 1945. The US only had 377 total in August 1945, so unless you're arguing that they were losing roughly 72% of production of new destroyers throughout the war, then your figure is clearly idiotic. There may have been a few days when they commissioned that many at once, probably to save time and resources on the ceremony.

Finally, a Fletcher (or Sumner or Gearing) class, while being one of the best all around designs of the war if not the best in the Pacific Theatre, is roughly three orders of magnitude less complex in total systems, sophistication and necessary tolerances in critical parts compared to a Burke. A Burke is also probably about three orders of magnitude more combat capable than a Fletcher overall, so there is that. No wonder they take longer to build.

Let's review: in one simple sentence, you made two incredible false and facile comparisons and got the only simple, easily researchable historical fact cited completely wrong. This is your daily reminder that it's not too late to end it all.

>>33987857
[Citations needed]

The average age of China's commissioned ships is 15. USN is 40.

>>33989408
>The average age of China's commissioned ships is 15. USN is 40.
Speaking of citation needed, as of Q4 FY2016:
Active Carriers/LHD/LHA/etc:
>10 Nimitz class, 1.04 million tons, average age 25.4 years
> 8 Wasp class, 329,200 tons, average age 19.25 years
>1 America class, 45,693 tons, average age 2 years
Active Battlecruiser, Cruiser and Destroyer hulls:
>22 Ticonderoga class cruisers, 215,600 tons, average age 25.9 years
>62 Burke class destroyers, 558,000 tons, average age 14.97 years
Active Frigate/LCS hulls:
>4 Independence class LCS, 12,416 tons, average age 2.25 years
>3 Freedom class LCS, 10,500 tons, average age 4.3 years
Average USN fleet age in the above 110 total ships: 17.5 years

Now you go do the math on the Chinese surface combatants. I'd be happy to post submarines as well, by the way, but it's even worse.

>>33989408
>>33989436
You know what? Fuck it. Here are the attack boats too:
The USN currently has 58 SSGN/SSNs in active service. Average ages for all active classes:
>38x 688/688I: 26.5 years
>3x Seawolf: 16 years
>13x Virginia: 6.1 years
>4x Ohio SSGN: 33.5 years
Average fleet age: 21.9 years

>>33986083
>why don't people aspire to be menial laborers like me

really makes you think

File: subgraphic_n97.png (3MB, 2668x1138px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2668x1138px

>>33988678

>Consider what, for instance, the Russian Navy's readiness standard is, or current Chinese training and doctrine standards are.
Right, that's the critical weakness of both forces. Especially the Chinese, who are close to a hundred years behind on total carrier operating experience. The Russians, though, are putting Syria and Ukraine to good use as laboratories for their general combat capabilities (albeit the wars overall are not great strategic achievements by any means). And both are spending as many spare dollars as they can on military modernization besides.

Moreover, the specter of A2/AD in the Western Pacific, as well as the the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle Eastern littorals, is a concern that would be partly remedied by greater numbers of ships. But I digress, that's and uncertain threat.

>Obviously we need more hulls to meet all our responsibilities, reduce maintenance and refit strain and increase fleet hull life by decreasing operational tempo, but on a comparative basis we're still king shit in the turd bin.
That's a fair assessment, I would say.

>>33988708

>I'm not sure I'd call 10 supercarriers, 9 LHD/LHAs, 84 Ticos/Burkes and 8 LCS a paucity.
Two oceans, global strategic interests, superior quality doesn't confer superior presence (proportionally, at any rate), etc.

>god-tier advantage in SSNs
Indeed. The problem with the Virginias isn't that they're not top-of-the-line boats; it's that there's too few of them, per my image. Granted, this graph is somewhat outdated now that the Navy is building a second sub in 2021, but one shouldn't discount the possibility of accelerated future production out of China either (which would increase the size requirements of the sub fleet).

On top of all this, it's strategically unwise to account for the Russians and the Chinese as anything less than a single cohesive military threat, in terms of potential conflicts.

File: 1473819638787.jpg (69KB, 640x795px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 640x795px

>>33989408
>>33989436
>>33989449
This made my day. Holy shit.
>anon makes ridiculous unsupportable statement, hoping no one actually knows the real numbers
>another anon comes along and IMMEDIATELY covers his entire face with semen

File: 7b08fd3b4aa96f1f0ec58054bbfb3ffb.jpg (223KB, 1150x960px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 1150x960px

>>33989406
>Finally, a Fletcher (or Sumner or Gearing) class, while being one of the best all around designs of the war if not the best in the Pacific Theatre, is roughly three orders of magnitude less complex in total systems, sophistication and necessary tolerances in critical parts compared to a Burke. A Burke is also probably about three orders of magnitude more combat capable than a Fletcher overall, so there is that. No wonder they take longer to build.

Don't forget the size and displacement!

>>33989467
Great graphic. Saved. Thanks for that easy to understand depiction of the sub gap.

As for that, yes, it's an excellent point and something the USN has been obsessing over since the Seawolf buy cancellations. However, not having as many as you'd like to fulfill current responsibilities which is being resolved over time with a short-term shortfall, and not having enough to settle any conceivable head on conventional conflict are two different things.

Remember that the attack boat fleet needs to have enough boats to cover ongoing secret squirrel missions, extensive ISR, special ops support AND cover every CSG/ESG deployed. That's a lot. But in a conflict there are still plenty of boats to shuffle around if needed, even at FY29 levels.

>>33989484
>semen
Did you mean seamen?

File: twelve carrier consecutive construction.jpg (202KB, 1000x621px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 1000x621px

why can't this happen now
build multiple carriers at once rather than one every five years

>>33989626
Because, you dingus, Congress has mandated that we need 11. So each one we build is a replacement for one retired. Since we're actually one behind at the moment, three are currently being built at once, but usually there's almost always either one or two baking in the oven.

The other reason is we don't want to spend 3% of our total GDP just on O&M and manning for the carrier and naval aviation fleets.

>>33989654
>So each one we build is a replacement for one retired.
so why aren't we building more fords to replace the nimitzes if the fords are supposed to be so much better

>>33989463
I don't think many people aspire to be baristas m8; unless they're dumb enough to get a theatre degree instead of running a business in the trades.

>>33989682
>so why aren't we building more fords to replace the nimitzes if the fords are supposed to be so much better
see >>33989436. Nimitz class carriers are designed to operate for 50 years. The first ship in class, USS Nimitz, will only retire in 2025 or a little later (commissioned 1975), and the rest of the class was commissioned one every four or so years after that. Thus, that's the rate of the Ford build.

As for capability, the Bush (the final Nimitz) is only 8 years old and damn near as capable as a Ford. The Nimitz designs were updated every two or three hulls, so it's actually three different distinct subclasses, with major upgrades for each hull every 25 years during refuel.

In short, "better than" does not by any means mean they are worthless. They're still extremely capable and modernized ships on the whole.

File: CSG Vinson Location.jpg (55KB, 634x567px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 634x567px

>>33989724
but what if we lose the vinson

>>33986078
Why do the Marines need a new rifle that is at best a tiny marginal improvement over their existing rifles, when CTSAS is only a few years out?

The 6.5 CT round even has the range that Marine brass loves, so they can go to the range and shoot hyper-realistic black dots at 1km.

>>33986129
An "anonymous" source that turned out to be the #2 guy in the FBI, whose sole motivation was revenge for being passed over as the next #1 guy.

>>33989757
Then we curbstomp the once responsible and build faster. Any conflict which sinks a USN carrier would see those responsible reduced unto annihilation in terms of actual naval power. Thus the balance is maintained, if not improved. Meanwhile, build pace is accelerated to cover the hull gap. The USN isn't building at this pace because it's the maximum possible, but because it's the most efficient in terms of sustaining current skills and industry and O&M costs in the budget while meeting responsibilities.

That's the other thing, you see. If we shit out 10 Fords all at once, then we've got 40 or so years where we're not building any supercarriers. What happens to all that military naval shipyard expertise in that time? For reference, look at Russia's current naval building capabilities with on a 14 year hiatus.

>>33986197
This.

This is not the first time that USN has played with ship counts in order to make it look like they're not shrinking rapidly. They've been doing this "We're not losing ship counts, honest!" dance for 20 years now. It's been going on for parts of 4 Administrations.

Stop making it a domestic political issue, when it's a Navy Beltway political issue.

>>33989822
>If we shit out 10 Fords all at once, then we've got 40 or so years where we're not building any supercarriers. What happens to all that military naval shipyard expertise in that time?
then we build carriers for our allies instead
japan philipines singapore canada britain

>>33989878
Anon, they can't even afford to man and maintain them, much less pay the cost of the hull or upgrades. How much money do you think a USN CVN costs per day while deployed? Even just sitting in port?

>>33989626
If we built multiple carriers at once, then we'd go 30+ years without building a carrier. It would then be very, very expensive to try and build a new class of carriers.

It actually makes more sense to keep a smaller production line open continuously, building carriers fast enough to replace old ones as they retire.

Also, that gives you the option to make minor modifications as you go along, rather than having to refit the entire class later.

>>33989535

>But in a conflict there are still plenty of boats to shuffle around if needed, even at FY29 levels.
I hope so. If nothing else, war mobilization can do some wonderful things, per >>33989626.

>>33989878
>>33989913
>The life-cycle cost per operating day of a carrier strike group (including aircraft) was estimated at $6.5 million in 2013 published by the Center for New American Security.[56]

So, assuming a 6 month deployment, that's about 1.19bn per deployment. Assuming they'd want one carrier deployed at all times, that's 2.38bn per year just on operational costs for that one carrier and escorts. The yearly defense budgets for the countries you mention:
Japan: 41bn
Phiilipines: 2.67bn
Singapore: 14.2bn
Canada: 15.5bn
Britain: 48.3bn
So, just looking at deployment costs per day, only Japan and Britain could actually afford the costs reasonably out of their entire defense budgets. And that doesn't include refit, maintenance, refuel, upgrade or total hull costs.

>>33990001
>And that doesn't include refit, maintenance, refuel, upgrade or total hull costs.
Or all the additional escort hulls they'd need to buy and maintain.

>>33989757

Would be extra-sad for me if Vinson was lost since I strolled around it once as a boy during port call in Singapore.

>>33989990
well no
You could just build all carrier hulls instead of smaller ships

Biggest problem for the USN is the huge amount of non-whites on ships, biggest problem for the US is that they are becoming a non-white country

Lotta people wanna tell fairy tales about how race doesn't matter, or how a country is based on its government/constitution rather than its people.

>>33985054
Surely he'll be impeached *this* week!

>>33992841
Special Prosecutor Mueller Get!

>>33992826
You should go to national marine corps museum. Their displays celebrate diversity in the navy all the way back to 1775.

>>33992826
The Han are mutts too, don't kid yourself.

>>33989878
>japan philipines singapore canada britain

Those aren't real countries in comparison to US wealth. so you may as well suggest building carriers for Monaco. How stupid are you? They aren't even in California's league. They can't afford power projection.

>>33992808
>You could just build all carrier hulls instead of smaller ships

You don't know how CBGs work or what goes into fielding a carrier. "Hurf, durf, a hull is a hull".

>>33994534
This. People forget that the greatest navy the world had ever seen before the USN in 1945 was the British Royal Navy circa 1815. On nearly every ship in that navy you could find a serious mix of black, Indian, Lascar, Musselman (as they used to call north African Muslims), Turkish, Greek, basically every ethnicity in the British empire. Ships that had been on station in the Indian or Pacific oceans especially carried many. Even John Company's (East India Company) ships were often almost wholly crewed by Lascars, Indonesians or Indians. The British armies fighting in Spain and southern France up to 1814 were little different.

Race means almost nothing against a strong, ordered military discipline. Everybody gets treated the same, everybody heaves on the same lines, everybody fights for their shipmates and great God in heaven help at the grate or yardarm you if you fuck up.

Moronic race baiters almost never know their damn history.

>>33986090
RT is fake news though

nice try vlad

>>33986083
ship made of metal. What carpenters? Maybe on a minesweeper.