Originally posted by timetothink
"The ships are gone"

Those in the know say we need at least 300 water vessels for our Navy to be safe and effective.

There are 12 carriers, by law. Today they are all nuclear powered. The last two conventional carriers, Kennedy and Kitty Hawk, were decommissioned several years ago; my son-in-law decommissioned both ships.

After all arrangements were made to decommission Kitty, he was instructed to call the ceremony something else because its replacement had not passed sea trials and therefore the Navy would violate the law by having only 11 operating carriers.

So they had a legend ceremony.

Shortly after, only the CO and one or two sailors remained. Four months later the last crew member, the CO, received a message to transfer from the ship. So for four months the Navy had a commissioned carrier, dead and no crew.

Now to the meat. If you were to ask our citizens "How big is our U.S. Navy?" you would receive all kinds of answers. Most would be large numbers, like 1,000 ships. Actually, it is 278, plus or minus -- the smallest number in some 80 years. There are 340 admirals, plus or minus a few.

The Sixth Fleet has one ship, and I don't think it has any guns or missiles. I'm not sure where that destroyer came from. The No. 1 one priority for our Navy, as demanded by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mullen, and the chief of naval operations, Adm. Roughead, is diversity. They are busy doing other things.

Our people have been put to sleep since the 1993 base closures, when the Navy lied to us about the size of the fleet. It was then 450, and nobody said anything when it dropped below 300. Where are the Kings, Halseys, Nimitzes and Burkes? We now have no warriors, only managers. James A. Kenney Capt., U.S. Navy (Retired)

www.postandcourier.com...

Ship Name Hull No. Class Type Homeport[1] Comment
USS Enterprise CVN-65 Enterprise Aircraft carrier Norfolk, VA [67]
USS Nimitz CVN-68 Nimitz Aircraft carrier San Diego, CA [164]
USS Dwight D. Eisenhower CVN-69 Nimitz Aircraft carrier Norfolk, VA [64]
USS Carl Vinson CVN-70 Nimitz Aircraft carrier San Diego, CA [30]
USS Theodore Roosevelt CVN-71 Nimitz Aircraft carrier Norfolk, VA [234]
USS Abraham Lincoln CVN-72 Nimitz Aircraft carrier Everett, WA [2]
USS George Washington CVN-73 Nimitz Aircraft carrier Yokosuka, Japan [80]
USS John C. Stennis CVN-74 Nimitz Aircraft carrier Bremerton, WA [116]
USS Harry S. Truman CVN-75 Nimitz Aircraft carrier Norfolk, VA [97]
USS Ronald Reagan CVN-76 Nimitz Aircraft carrier San Diego, CA [199]
USS George H.W. Bush CVN-77 Nimitz Aircraft carrier Norfolk, VA [81]

Ship Name Hull No. Class Type Keel Date Launch Date Comment
Gerald R. Ford CVN-78 Gerald R. Ford Aircraft carrier 13 Nov 2009 [438]

Ship Name Hull No. Class Type Comment
John F. Kennedy CVN-79 Gerald R. Ford Aircraft carrier Development
Unnamed CVN-80 Gerald R. Ford Aircraft carrier

Originally posted by mademyself1984
I can assure you, that in my three years spent serving this country in Iraq, bayonets are still issued, bayonets are still used and bayonets are still a necessary weapon in today's infantry and marine corps. That is a fact. You would have absolutely no knowledge of whether or not bayonets are a viable means of combat in today's military. I know this to be true, because you claimed they aren't.

We spoke with Dan Riker from Bayonet Inc. -- a leading military surplus outlet that specializes in bayonets -- who tells us he believes Obama's comment was "ignorant ... because our soldiers still use bayonets."

Originally posted by NoJoker13
your idea of 'information' goes hand and hand with Mitt's idea about transparent policy.

Originally posted by butcherguy

Originally posted by masqua
reply to post by butcherguy

---

I guess you missed that bit about a 'bayonet' being something being attached to the business end of a rifle and used much like a spear. These days, with automatic weapons, it's far easier to just shoot a few rounds rather than sticking your assault rifle into an enemy combatant and then having to do the 'struggling to pull it out again' dance.

That's why bayonet drills were dropped from training.

You can call a knife a bayonet if you like, though.

You are pretty snarky for a moderator.

Maybe you can take a break from that and read up on bayonets. I posted a link.

They still mount on the end of a rifle,
They are multiple-function tools.....

And they still call them, get this......

Bayonets.

Why do you think they manufacture them with the ability to mount them onto a rifle? It is to use them as a spear.

They aren't just knives.

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by masqua

---

So because YOU think they are useless, that means that the military doesn't use them?

They use them, it's a fact whether you agree or not. Check the marine website yourself.

None of it changes the fact that again Obama lied, we have more bayonets in the military now than 1916, and his analogy sucked.

Also the point of his statement was to compare the uselessness of bayonets and horses to the Navy. His whole mission is to cut the military.

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask

Originally posted by illuminated0ne
reply to post by SrWingCommander

---

President Obama never claimed anyone stopped using bayonets. He said we use less bayonets, which is true.

Bayonets are generally for close quarters fighting. War has changed, and tactics have changed, weapons have changed, and fighting from a distance has become the norm. So there is less and less close quarters fighting, and less need for a bayonet.

I love all the armchair military out there...........

I mean is this the real issue? The real issue should be how we are implementing our military in the first place.....

That being said......

there is still PLENTY of close quarters fighting, I suppose everyone who loves Obamas response on this has completely forgot about all the urban fighting and house clearing we (yes i said we cause i was one of the many who had to do it) had to, and still have to do?

Having a large knife at arms length you can use while being able to stay out of striking range is def preferable....

Not to mention the stop and go gun battles that happen quite often, ammo starts to run scare.....guess what happens then?

How bout we keep the speculation and b.s. to a minimum and actually listen to people who were in the service, instead of pretending to be experts eh?

edit on 23-10-2012 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)