SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Al Gore vs George Bush: the moderate's perspective -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: long-gone who wrote (6181)11/15/2000 2:56:06 PM
From: quasar_1  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 10042
 
World War II is Over...

Hardly, history has shown the goal of the US military planners, to be able to fight a two front war, a valid time proven one, as we have more than two coasts and even more international interests.

The two front war option is outmoded. We are no longer in the cold war. The military planners are split on the advisability of maintaining 'dual front' readiness. Who are these dual enemies. Nobody will attack either coast. This is not 1942. We have dominant nuclear capability both tactical and strategic. We can deliver nuclear weapons to anywhere from anywhere. We patrol the world's seas. We have the most sophisticated Air Force in the world.

Our inventories of munitions are below the danger threshold to the point our Men & Women in uniform(even front line infantry) are often allowed less training ammunition than the average US police officer.

How can this be after 6 years of Republican domination of the House and recent hold over the Senate? Some of the munitions that are in dispute were so old they may not even function anymore. The keys to future global wars (if there are any), will not be how many bullets you have. Once again, this is old line thinking. The new weapons coming on stream (which Governor Bush supports) might not even use bullets. They will rely on sound, particle beam and other high technology killing and stunning technologies. There may not even be a human soldier firing them. In the recent Balkan conflict, the US conducted the war from thousands of feet above the battlefield. How many US soldiers died in that conflict? We're quickly passing the 'musket' stage here. This complaint strikes me as a canard.

Our inventory of missiles(not just ICBM's) is at a 30 year low, so low in fact that military missions have been changed, substituting troop danger for cruise missiles due to shortage.

Which military mission was changed? Our most recent two wars, the Gulf and the Balkan had surprisingly few casualties. That is because the wars were conducted primarily from the air. What is the current status of cruise missile inventory? ICBM's are being destroyed due to arms control treaties signed by both Republican and Democratic administrations. In fact one of the most important treaties was signed by Ronald Reagan for which he deserves enormous credit.

All parts of the press except the far left mainstream) are ripe with stories about lack of fuel available for training flights(guess it's all fueling Air Force 1,2 & Hillary's flights).

There are fuel shortages worldwide right now. This has far more to do with refinery capacity than anything else. What is the 'far left' mainstream?

This is far to near "collapse" for my taste, we need go no further down this road toward destruction, in fact we need backtrack many miles.

This is the telling statement. It reinforces my statement that these are your 'feelings' at work here. I'll ask you again, who is the superpower that currently threatens us? The threats are much greater from very small terrorist groups and nuclear proliferation to smaller states (North Korea, Pakistan, India, Iraq). The military is going through a difficult transition from one built to fight WWII in two theaters to a more mobile, modern, high technology, information rich fighting force. Our military expenditures should reflect this. We should invest in higher pay and benefits for our personnel, better quality of life for all our armed services, lighter smarter weapons('mobile' 90 ton howitzers are not going to get it anymore), better mobility, better command and control, and better information gathering (intelligence) and processing. It is also very important to keep lines of diplomatic communication open to all sides in an impending conflict. In the end, free world trade and growing global prosperity is the most important defense of all.

World War II is over...we won...

Thanks for your thoughts...

Q



To: long-gone who wrote (6181)11/15/2000 3:22:52 PM
From: long-gone  Respond to of 10042
 
Yes, WW II is over, let's pray we aren't weakened too the point there is a WW III.
China Pledges to Rival U.S. Navy

07 December, 1998

By Jon E. Dougherty
CNS // USA Journal Online

(CNS // USA Journal) - Accelerated acquisition and construction of surface warships and submarines "underscore China's relentless effort to challenge U.S. naval forces in the western Pacific," noted analysts this month at the American Foreign Policy Council, a non-profit center that monitors current political, military and social changes in China and Russia.

Though the AFPC said China's goal of parity with the U.S. navy should be achieved by about 2050, the CIA has said that China and other potentially hostile nations are developing increased military capabilities "at an alarming rate," noting they have been caught off guard by recent advanced nuclear tests.

Not only that but analysts here in the United States have said the greatest threat to future U.S. security may not necessarily be newer weapons fielded by hostile countries but rather apathy in Congress and the White House.

"The most serious challenge in preventing China from Pacific dominance is the lack of urgency to address the problem by Washington officials and the Congress," wrote Greg Claires in the publication Defense News.

Chinese leaders have stated in numerous journals and doctrinal statements that they desire to equal the United States as a naval power by the mid-21st Century. For example, the PLA demonstrated its undersea warfare capability during the 1996 Taiwan Strait crisis, when it deployed eight submarines to intimidate the Taiwanese during their national election.

The U.S. Navy has earmarked $1 billion during its 2000-2005 spending plan to address the threat posed by Chinese submarines, such as the Kilo-class subs the PLA recently purchased from Russia.

Besides beefing up efforts to transform the Chinese navy from a 'brown water ' coastal defense force into a power projection 'blue water' force capable of meeting and defeating U.S. and western navies, the Chinese People's Liberation Army [PLA] has been pouring money into the research and development of a variety of newer land-based and airborne weapons systems.

Defense News also reported that organizers of the China International Aerospace Exposition in Zuhai planned live launches of ballistic cruise and tactical missiles. PLA personnel planned to demonstrate the Flying Mongoose-80 surface-to-air guided missile, M-9 tactical ballistic missiles, a shoulder-launched Vanguard Number 1 Ultralow Altitude Guided Missile, and C801 and C301 cruise missiles.

In an October visit to Beijing, Russian Defense Secretary Igor Sergeyev, committed Russia to helping China develop high-precision weapons systems and transfer production licenses to Beijing.

"Moscow is ready to assist China's transformation into a first-class military power," wrote the Russian newspaper Nezavisimaya Gazeta. "Especially considering the fact that Beijing is ready to pay for that in freely convertible currency."

Russian officials have been quoted as saying that China is interested in adding Sukhoi Su-30 fighter-bombers to their arsenal of Russian weapons, which includes jet-fighters, submarines, anti-aircraft batteries and deadly anti-ship cruise missiles. China is Russia's second-largest arms customer, after India.

Western defense experts say that China's main objective in weapons purchases from Russia is to gain access to advanced technology. China's "shopping spree" in Russia is especially troubling, the Post adds, because most of Asia is "reeling from an economic crisis that has gutted arms acquisition programs."

These revelations come on the heels of repeated pleas from congressional and Pentagon sources for more funding for upgrading U.S. nuclear arsenals, troop equipment, and aging weapons systems.

One such request – that the U.S. quickly develop and deploy a national missile defense system – has repeatedly been met with malaise by Congress and the Clinton administration. The current policy for a national missile defense system is the "3-plus-3 plan," which calls for three years of development and study then three more years to deploy the best system available.

One expert noted that preceding every major war in which the U.S. became embroiled in the Twentieth Century was a distinctive period of "drawing down" of American military forces and capabilities for "a number of years."

Meanwhile, China is preparing a flight test of a new DF-31 mobile intercontinental ballistic missile that can hit Hawaii, Alaska and the western continental United States, according to published reports.

U.S. intelligence expressed concern that the test, which is scheduled for early December, is part of an intimidation campaign against Taiwan and to warn the U.S. against intervention in the Taiwan Strait. Satellite photographs taken over the past several weeks of the Wuzhai Missile and Space Center, north of Beijing, reveal increased test preparations for an "ejection test" of the DF-31.

The DF-31, with a 5,000-mile range, is the first Chinese missile capable of being launched on roads. Mobile long-range missiles, such as the Russian SS-25, are extremely effective because they can be moved easily and fired quickly. The new missile uses solid fuel, which enables it to be launched in minutes, and is equipped with a "second-generation" thermonuclear warhead with a yield of 500 kilotons or 500,000 tons of TNT.

Military strategists add that the difficulty of finding, and then neutralizing, mobile missile launchers was typified during the Gulf War, when U.S. and allied forces had a difficult time finding and destroying Iraqi mobile SCUD launchers.

A 1996 U.S. National Air Intelligence Center report said the DF-31 "will narrow the gap between Chinese, U.S. and Russian ballistic missile designs." The Center also said in a "secret" report, the DF-31 "will give China a major strike capability that will be difficult to counterattack at any stage of its operation, from pre-flight mobile operations through terminal flight phases."

Copyright 1998 USA Journal Online.