Comments on: The Purpose of the Navy… http://blog.usni.org/2009/04/04/the-purpose-of-the-navy/ The Naval Institute’s taken its independent forum to a new level - with you in the middle of it. Sat, 11 Feb 2012 23:43:34 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Former Submariner http://blog.usni.org/2009/04/04/the-purpose-of-the-navy/comment-page-2/#comment-210072 Former Submariner Mon, 15 Mar 2010 15:08:53 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=2046#comment-210072 A fun and somewhat interesting intellectual debate and the original post and subsequent comments seem to be mostly about promoting individual biases and agendas as well as showcasing the poster's intellectual dilletanism. Fun stuff I'm sure, but in no way an accurate portrayal of the Admiral or the state of US Naval readiness. Having been gone from the Navy since the mid 90's I can't accurately comment on the current state of readiness. Frankly, I doubt that anyone else posting here can accurately comment either. I can, however, comment on the capabilities of Vice Admiral John Bird. I served and worked closely with him for several years. I found him to be perhaps the most versatile and STRATEGIC leaders I ever met. He was well read, open minded, but absolutely willing to decisively lead from the front. Rest assured, John Bird gets what the military's role is. It's comforting to believe that the role of the military is just to fight wars, but the world is much more complex and US foreign policy requires a combination of a velvet glove and a strong fist applied appropriately. The US military has always been and continues to be an important tool for projecting power and influencing "political" outcomes and nothing in his quote leads me to believe that he doesn't understand that. Put simply, why fight a war if you can influence the outcome by your presence. A fun and somewhat interesting intellectual debate and the original post and subsequent comments seem to be mostly about promoting individual biases and agendas as well as showcasing the poster’s intellectual dilletanism. Fun stuff I’m sure, but in no way an accurate portrayal of the Admiral or the state of US Naval readiness.

Having been gone from the Navy since the mid 90′s I can’t accurately comment on the current state of readiness. Frankly, I doubt that anyone else posting here can accurately comment either. I can, however, comment on the capabilities of Vice Admiral John Bird.

I served and worked closely with him for several years. I found him to be perhaps the most versatile and STRATEGIC leaders I ever met. He was well read, open minded, but absolutely willing to decisively lead from the front.

Rest assured, John Bird gets what the military’s role is. It’s comforting to believe that the role of the military is just to fight wars, but the world is much more complex and US foreign policy requires a combination of a velvet glove and a strong fist applied appropriately. The US military has always been and continues to be an important tool for projecting power and influencing “political” outcomes and nothing in his quote leads me to believe that he doesn’t understand that.

Put simply, why fight a war if you can influence the outcome by your presence.

]]> By: Are American Warships Obsolete? Pt 2 « New Wars http://blog.usni.org/2009/04/04/the-purpose-of-the-navy/comment-page-2/#comment-124963 Are American Warships Obsolete? Pt 2 « New Wars Tue, 14 Jul 2009 09:51:11 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=2046#comment-124963 [...] be far cheaper than today’s mostly battleship Navy, filled with budget parasites whose only purpose is not to fight, but to overawe an enemy by its mere presence. Such a strategy as we have now is too costly to send [...] [...] be far cheaper than today’s mostly battleship Navy, filled with budget parasites whose only purpose is not to fight, but to overawe an enemy by its mere presence. Such a strategy as we have now is too costly to send [...]

]]> By: Streamlining Battleship Production « New Wars http://blog.usni.org/2009/04/04/the-purpose-of-the-navy/comment-page-2/#comment-111425 Streamlining Battleship Production « New Wars Wed, 20 May 2009 09:51:37 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=2046#comment-111425 [...] the “purpose of the Navy is not to fight” then you can build anything you want until your money runs out. If the main purpose of a [...] [...] the “purpose of the Navy is not to fight” then you can build anything you want until your money runs out. If the main purpose of a [...]

]]> By: From Atheism to Belief: A Journey to Islam in North America by Dr. Jeffrey Lang (Part 1/17) | IslamLecture http://blog.usni.org/2009/04/04/the-purpose-of-the-navy/comment-page-2/#comment-105208 From Atheism to Belief: A Journey to Islam in North America by Dr. Jeffrey Lang (Part 1/17) | IslamLecture Sat, 11 Apr 2009 15:22:29 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=2046#comment-105208 [...] The Purpose of the Navy… | USNI Blog [...] [...] The Purpose of the Navy… | USNI Blog [...]

]]> By: Hayball http://blog.usni.org/2009/04/04/the-purpose-of-the-navy/comment-page-2/#comment-104908 Hayball Wed, 08 Apr 2009 17:09:44 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=2046#comment-104908 Isn't it just terrible when evil men, not even enemies of the republic, just the common enemy of all mankind, don't act the way we expect? How can there be pirates in the 21st century! Why how can one possibly save funds on shipbuilding by tailoring the design to the threats we deem most likely? How can you possibly ensure low cost efficient defense budgeting if you can't predict the future accurately? It's just CHAOS! Don't they understand our national priorities require cutting back on military expenditures. It's just impossible to understand the thinking behind such actions! (Disclaimer - Hayball is being sarcastic again- sarcasm warning.) Isn’t it just terrible when evil men, not even enemies of the republic, just the common enemy of all mankind, don’t act the way we expect? How can there be pirates in the 21st century!

Why how can one possibly save funds on shipbuilding by tailoring the design to the threats we deem most likely? How can you possibly ensure low cost efficient defense budgeting if you can’t predict the future accurately? It’s just CHAOS!

Don’t they understand our national priorities require cutting back on military expenditures. It’s just impossible to understand the thinking behind such actions!

(Disclaimer – Hayball is being sarcastic again- sarcasm warning.)

]]> By: Byron http://blog.usni.org/2009/04/04/the-purpose-of-the-navy/comment-page-2/#comment-104897 Byron Wed, 08 Apr 2009 14:28:05 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=2046#comment-104897 Worked right well, as I recall. Kindler, gentler Navy. Wouldn't want the media to get upset now... Worked right well, as I recall. Kindler, gentler Navy. Wouldn’t want the media to get upset now…

]]> By: sid http://blog.usni.org/2009/04/04/the-purpose-of-the-navy/comment-page-1/#comment-104896 sid Wed, 08 Apr 2009 14:08:15 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=2046#comment-104896 <i>Only one form of deterrence works: no pirates returning home, or ever being heard from again. Hang ‘em high.</i> There was a time <a href="http://www.portcities.org.uk/london/upload/img_400/D3864_15.jpg" rel="nofollow">when the problem was addressed in just that manner</a>... Only one form of deterrence works: no pirates returning home, or ever being heard from again. Hang ‘em high.

There was a time when the problem was addressed in just that manner…

]]> By: Byron http://blog.usni.org/2009/04/04/the-purpose-of-the-navy/comment-page-1/#comment-104895 Byron Wed, 08 Apr 2009 13:54:12 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=2046#comment-104895 Only one form of deterrence works: no pirates returning home, or ever being heard from again. Hang 'em high. Only one form of deterrence works: no pirates returning home, or ever being heard from again. Hang ‘em high.

]]> By: sid http://blog.usni.org/2009/04/04/the-purpose-of-the-navy/comment-page-1/#comment-104893 sid Wed, 08 Apr 2009 13:27:54 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=2046#comment-104893 <i><b>The mere presence of the Navy should suffice, he argues, to dissuade any attack or attempt to destabilize the region.</b></i> Downright vexing <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/09/world/africa/09pirates.html?ref=global-home" rel="nofollow">when the foe exercises his right to shape the fight</a>... <b>The Maersk Alabama was at least the sixth commercial ship commandeered by pirates this week off the Horn of Africa, one of the most notoriously lawless zones on the high seas, where pirates have been operating with near impunity despite efforts by many nations, including the United States, to intimidate them with naval warship patrols.</b> The mere presence of the Navy should suffice, he argues, to dissuade any attack or attempt to destabilize the region.

Downright vexing when the foe exercises his right to shape the fight…

The Maersk Alabama was at least the sixth commercial ship commandeered by pirates this week off the Horn of Africa, one of the most notoriously lawless zones on the high seas, where pirates have been operating with near impunity despite efforts by many nations, including the United States, to intimidate them with naval warship patrols.

]]> By: UltimaRatioReg http://blog.usni.org/2009/04/04/the-purpose-of-the-navy/comment-page-1/#comment-104770 UltimaRatioReg Mon, 06 Apr 2009 18:26:48 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=2046#comment-104770 "I think the VADM may have said something stupid" Agreed, gal. But my concern is that neither he nor the BIG Navy thinks it's stupid. It falls frighteningly into line with the erosion of a warfighting focus that manifests itself with attitudes and actions across the Navy. Some of the comments on this very site to posted blogs are included. There remains no greater test of the value of an American military force than its ability to succeed in combat, and win its nation's wars. Assertions to the contrary are absurdly naive. “I think the VADM may have said something stupid”

Agreed, gal. But my concern is that neither he nor the BIG Navy thinks it’s stupid. It falls frighteningly into line with the erosion of a warfighting focus that manifests itself with attitudes and actions across the Navy.

Some of the comments on this very site to posted blogs are included.

There remains no greater test of the value of an American military force than its ability to succeed in combat, and win its nation’s wars. Assertions to the contrary are absurdly naive.

]]>