01-28-2017, 07:29 PM
(01-28-2017, 06:55 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:(01-28-2017, 04:30 PM)SomeGuy Wrote:Quote:Agreed. We left a big power vacuum on the high seas for half a decade; we need to avoid another half decade of that if we're to retain our preeminent global position.
It's worse than that. The post-Cold War draw-down in the 90s, and the distraction of the GWoT during the 2000s, ended up shedding a lot of capabilities we used to train regularly, that are needed for great power politics as opposed to police actions.
I think I agree but I am interested in what examples you are thinking of. The kinds of things the Seawolf class was intended to address? The F-22? Or things more general?
The Seawolf thing isn't that big a deal, the Virginia class is proving quite capable, and relatively cheap (for DoD values of the same, of course). The cancellation of the F-22/continuing saga with the F-35 doesn't help, though both of those planes are a little short-ranged for the Pacific.
I was thinking more along the lines of our atrophying EW, anti-submarine, and anti-surface capabilities, and the shrinking Navy in general. The whole point of the "From the Sea" thing promulgated by the US Navy in the 90s was an assumption that sea-control was a given and that they should train primarily for power projection. Which was an accurate description of the period and its immediate future, but which is giving them a bit of an "Oh Shit!" moment now.