HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Rmoney was wrong..... aga...

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 05:19 AM

Rmoney was wrong..... again. RE Navy

The point at which it was smallest was.... 2007.

Wonder who the pres was at that time?

http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/org9-4.htm

Seems the number has been dropping since 1985.

5 replies, 756 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 5 replies Author Time Post
Reply Rmoney was wrong..... again. RE Navy (Original post)
Confusious Oct 2012 OP
grasswire Oct 2012 #1
MADem Oct 2012 #2
Justice Oct 2012 #3
liberal N proud Oct 2012 #5
The Straight Story Oct 2012 #4

Response to Confusious (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 05:25 AM

1. well well well

smallest under George W., eh?

Great work, thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Confusious (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 05:52 AM

2. Ronald Reagan wanted a 600 ship Navy to intimidate the Russkies.

That's why the ranks were so bloated in the eighties. The drawdown after that was a consequence of several factors; the reductions in force that followed the Berlin Wall coming down, along with advances in technology (which eventually evolved in later years into the whole "SMART SHIPS" paradigm--requiring fewer sailors to crew a vessel) and then there were some deep and wide cuts across the board at shore-based commands, as well. Chains of command were streamlined, functions consolidated, a lot of redundant stovepiping of personnel assets was eliminated--it was quite the retooling over the course of fifteen or so years. It was a painful process for many.

AND THEN...in came Dumbya and his wars.

Since there's a limited number, mandated by Congress, of personnel who can serve on active duty, and the USA and USMC had a greater role in Dumbya's wars, the Robbing Peter to Pay Paul commenced. The Navy and Air Force sacrificed (well, they kicked, screamed and did what DOD told them to do) their assets so that Army and USMC could plus-up theirs. The Navy had to do more with less, so they continued to seek out efficiencies, banish redundant and unnecessary work to centralized assets or, better still, eliminate them entirely, and bada-bing!-- they're down to fighting weight in a big way.

Of course, rMoney can't find his way from Iran to Syria, so I doubt he'd understand the reasons behind Naval personnel fluctuations over the last thirty or so years!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Confusious (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 06:06 AM

3. I think Romney said that only to pick up votes in VA from Newport News area

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Justice (Reply #3)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 06:52 AM

5. It was the only thing that Romney has to hold on the the military

The military has voted republican for the last 30 or more years. (I still don't know why)

They have held things out there to appeal to the career military people and the totally brainwashed who believe in the scorched earth method of keeping peace.

He had to throw something out there to bait that group and claiming that Obama is shrinking the Navy was what popped into his pea size brain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Confusious (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 06:34 AM

4. Also:

"During World War II the United States built 1,000 ships per year with 1,000 people employed in the Bureau of Ships, as the purchasing department of the Department of the Navy was then called. By the 1980s, we were building seventeen ships per year, with 4,000 people in purchasing. Today, when we are building only nine ships a year, the Pentagon manages the shipbuilding process with some 25,000 people." - Mitt


http://forestofwords.blogspot.com/2012/05/mitt-romneys-plan-for-military.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread