Comments by "Arthur Mosel" (@arthurmosel808) on "Why is US Navy Retiring a 6-Year Old Ship?" video.

The prroblem was future threat analysis. Too many people no longer believed that we face peer forces. Result, plan for a smaller navy that needed fewer men and won't face a peer threat. Dumb, Dumb
6
@JohnRodriguesPhotographer You properly describe the "woke" mind set.
2
@whitescar2 Sorry, but your beliefs don't hold water. You sound like someone who believes that your beliefs are the only o n es that everyone holds. Right now the Progressives accuse Europeans of destroying everything and replacing everything with European standards; while not realizing they are trying to do the same. Remember the old saw that all people want the same things; well think about this everyone wants happiness; a headhunter will have a very different idea of happiness than someone who isn't a headhunter. The same desire but a very different view of what happiness is. Well, nations and ethnic groups all have very different ideas about what meets those simple global desires, and vaccumes are filled. When one power declines others try to take its place; and when all powers leave anarchy replaces it. Think Somali piracy.
1
@whitescar2 You seem to belong to the group who think all people should think like you and have the same end process, exactly what "Progressives" attack Europeans over. Yes, at a macro level everyone wants food, to be happy, etc.; however, happiness for example isn't the same for everyone. An extreme example would be what would make a headhunter happy will hardly make a non-headhunter happy. Yes, I know there are few headhunters in this world; but, there are different cultures with different beliefs than yours. That a major enemy has ceased to be an immediate threat that doesn't mean other threats cease to exist. Major powers have stopped controlling large parts of Africa. What has replaced them, Somali pirates and civil war, Libyan civil war and slave markets, genecide between tribal enemies. You need to wake up not be "woke".
1
@whitescar2 As to these ships, not many have been made, and those weren't well designed. Under former President Obama, the overall US military shrank. New equipment wasn't procured and rules of engagement issued that placed US lives at risk. Libya which had allowed inspectors full access under former President Bush had a forced regime change under then President Obama. That same President undermined an essentially friendly government in Egypt and encouraged the Syrian bloodbath before backing out. Those weren't the type of acts that the US Government should have undertaken, and he was a Progressive.
1
@whitescar2 Sorry you can't understand what is implied by your own comment. You accused the US military looking for new enemies to justify its existence. You seem to not understand that peace only exists because someone makes those who would break it realize the result of breaking the peace is worse than the status quo. That my friend is part of the "woke progressives'" blindness. The inability of seeing anything that doesn't fit their belief system. You typify that to me. Perhaps you don't think so; just like saying the military isn't worried about the troops, why Obama's negative contributions towards world peace and US troop safety were mentioned.
1
@whitescar2 That is where you are wrong. Under former President Obama's first Sec of Def, the position was there would be no peer adversary and no nuclear threat. He once said words to the affect no one uses ballistic missiles anymore and side lined the airborne laser program which was due to have two AF squadrons around 2012. Not necessarily affective against a peer threat, but quite capable against North Korea or Iran (which Obama helped fund). The railgun which was to be a feature of the Zumwalt class was side lined and a long range cannon to replace it had ammunition too expensive to buy or train with. Those were military decisions, they were political and policy decisions made without logic. By the way, if you check, the PRC actually has two navies in effect. The regular navy and a coast guard that essentially operates frigate class ships as well as smaller vessels. It alone surpasses the navies of many smaller states surrounding the South China Sea. Again I say do research.
1
@whitescar2 By the way, since I don't know you and we have major disagreement, please don't call me mate.
1
@whitescar2 First and foremost your comments prove that you can't get beyond certain beliefs. One, that a biased assessment of future risk based on a biased set of factors is wrong. I notice you ignored the 600 pound guerilla, the canceling of a program that would mitigate Iran's and North Korea's nuclear missile ambitions, which were already clear. The blindness to the PRC ambitions and those were made clear by the manmade islands which former President Obama and then VP Biden ignored. Putin was already developing new nuclear weapons before former President Trump took office and the Obama Administration did nothing. Former President Obama shifted NASA's attention from space to diversity and climate, leaving Russia and the CCP to move into the void. So flawed or biased politically motivated threat analysis controlled military policy, and generals and admirals supporting those analysis were promoted. As to upgrading existing systems and not developing new ones; sometimes their are clear advantages to buying the more expensive spread. A railgun doesn't need explosive propellants or a bursting charge, the effect is kinetic energy. This reduces, the need to protect magazines and the danger of accidental or combat explosions and fires; thereby making the ship safer. Additionally the range would have given a significant advantage. The cannon that was used to replace it had a good range, but at the expense of higher cost per round (which limited procurement of the shells), was less than the range of a railgun and required explosive propellants and shells. Then, the question of upgrading a 30 year old hull, electronis and propulsion system has to be considered. Even with upgrades, a 30 year old hull is 30 years old. For upgrades to work, often completely new parts are needed, for an aircraft an easier task. The A10 upgrade has new wing spars included, which means a great deal of the aircraft is literally new. The idea of buying new F15s sound weird, but again, even though the design is old a newly completed or completely rebuilt airframe (since stealth only air fleets are over rated since new tech has limited its effectiveness against peer forces) makes sense with standoff weapons and drone swarms. Rebuilding a ship's hull is a larger commitment in terms of available resources. The ship will be out of use for several years at least, and in the meantime the operational forces will be reduced further. I do agree that the Zumwalt's have significant issues because of assumptions made when designed; I would agree a more conventional design probably would have been better. The railgun could have still been included, and a more effective vessel resulted. Slightly changing the subject, the LCS was a popular because it required less crew, thereby reducing operating costs at the expense of personnel but decreasing the ship's ability to deal with damage. This wasn't a factor if you weren't dealing with non-peer adversaries, but quite significant with peers.
1
@whitescar2 As has been your objectivity. I sggest that you misjudge reading ability with your lack of understand or willingness to see beyond your own mind set.
1
@whitescar2 Again you ignore things the progressive Obama Admin did. The cancelation of projects was his administration. The shrinkage of the military was on his watch. You choose to ignore whar you can't defend and add personal attacks. Very "Progressive" of you. By the way, from your use of "matey", where are you really from, so we can discuss your nation's behavior as well.
1
@whitescar2 No my friend, too many nations have depended on US defense dollars; and when the people who have used the US as shield complain about the nation, I find it interesting. It is especially telling when they become upset about their location and country's actions. You keep making my point, you have a Point of view that differs from mine; but, I am wrong and you are right. I have served my nation and have studied history since I was 16 and that was many years ago. I have lived in foreign nations, and studied materials from them. What is also telling is that you don't rebut facts but increasing show you beliefs. I am not ashamed to say that I support my nation, but I notice you won't even claim yours.
1
@whitescar2 By the way, I am not alt right, too bad the left won't recognize they are far more extremist then the majority of the population in the middle or right. Denial isn't just a river in Egypt; it is the life's blood of the left.
1
B-52's provide a major combat power; while these vessels were weakly armed. Correcting the problems, given their weak combat potential, makes little sense. Additionally, the type of warfare in the future is far different than the inshore missions against weaker forces than the increasing Blue Water threat of the PRC.
1