6 ms·

According to retired officers, the issue stems from training cuts. >For nearly 30 years, all new surface warfare officers spent their first six months in unifo

According to retired officers, the issue stems from training cuts. >For nearly 30 years, all new surface warfare officers spent their first six months in uniform at the Surface Warfare Officer’s School in Newport, Rhode Island, learning the theory behind driving ships and leading sailors as division officers. But that changed in 2003. The Navy decided to eliminate the “SWOS Basic” school and simply send surface fleet officers out to sea to learn on the job. The Navy did that mainly to save money, and the fleet has suffered severely for it, said retired Cmdr. Kurt Lippold. “The Navy has cut training as a budgetary device and they have done it at the expense of our ability to operate safely at sea,” said Lippold, who commanded the destroyer Cole in 2000 when it was attacked by terrorists in Yemen. https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2017/08/27/navy-swos-a-culture-in-crisis/ https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2017/08/27/navy-swo...

sametmax 8y ago
And yet, the US had no problem spending 600 billions of dollar for the war in Irak. And after that, elect a second time the president that started it. I have a hard time feeling compassion.
- austincheney 8y ago
  I don't see the relation between any of the things you mentioned. I gave you downvote because I believe your comment seeks to inflame and distract from the conversation at present.
  - zakki 8y ago
    Related to the war, maybe he wanted to say don’t go to war, use (some of) the money for the training.
jacobush 8y ago
Ok, I don't like these bastards who attacked Cole, but how can they be terrorist? They attacked a military target. Is it because they masqueraded as civilians - didn't follow the laws of war?
- cf141q5325 8y ago
  They were part of a group that is classified as a terrorist organization.
  - jacobush 8y ago
    Ok, I can buy that - it's not perfect, but the world is messy. :-/
    - Sebguer 8y ago
      It's also worth noting that it was a suicide bomber attack, which is rarely a facet of conventional warfare.
      - Frondo 8y ago
        Rare, though with one prominent usage in the 40s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamikaze https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamikaze
- dmurray 8y ago
  The word "terrorist" has been reappropriated, possibly because "guerilla warfare", "asymmetric warfare" etc sound too glamorous. In the US it mostly means any military action by non-state actors against the US and its allies.
  - JustSomeNobody 8y ago
    It was re-appropriated because it is easy to get the American people on board with spending bucket loads of money on it. It's a trillion dollar industry, terrorism is. People are getting wealthy off of it. Forget that almost no attacks happen. Forget that more people die each year choking on food. Let's spend money like it's free!
  - balabaster 8y ago
    When you say non-state, you surely mean by parties whom aren't favourable to US interests. It's interesting that when a government or party that's not in the US's best interests is in power, it's okay for the CIA to use asymmetric tactics to fund rebels and favourable terrorism, stage coups d'etat, overthrow governments and meddle in foreign elections but when those parties seek to do the same to the US, it's terrorism. Kind of hypocritical really. But that's US exceptionalism for you. It's only bad when someone else does it. It's almost impossible at this point to point a finger and say "there's the bad guy, right there" because both sides are as bad as the other and both using much the same tactics on one another, both spewing rhetoric and hatred in the face of the other terrorists. It's like trying to mediate a kindergarten playground fight where the cost of losing the fight is death instead of being dragged to the principal's office by your ears. It's so undignified it's nauseating.
Shivetya 8y ago
The Navy is still centered around too many overly expensive to build and maintain carrier groups. They had their glory days but tactics pretty force them into only being useful against smaller opponents. They do sure look pretty. Part of this inter service rivalry but part is just its too hard to give up what you are used too. However there was both traction in moving away from that[1] and the old guard coming back for more[2]. They are expensive to put together, twenty billion to thirty billion per task force and hundreds of millions per year just in crew salaries to run. [1] https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2019/01/15/the-us-navy-moves-toward-unleashing-killer-robot-ships-on-the-worlds-oceans/ https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2019/01/15/the-us-navy-mov... [2] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-defense-carriers/u-s-navy-pursuing-block-buy-of-two-aircraft-carriers-senator-idUSKCN1OV189 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-defense-carriers/u-s-...

sametmax 8y ago

And yet, the US had no problem spending 600 billions of dollar for the war in Irak. And after that, elect a second time the president that started it. I have a hard time feeling compassion.

austincheney 8y ago
I don't see the relation between any of the things you mentioned. I gave you downvote because I believe your comment seeks to inflame and distract from the conversation at present.
- zakki 8y ago
  Related to the war, maybe he wanted to say don’t go to war, use (some of) the money for the training.

jacobush 8y ago

Ok, I don't like these bastards who attacked Cole, but how can they be terrorist? They attacked a military target. Is it because they masqueraded as civilians - didn't follow the laws of war?

cf141q5325 8y ago
They were part of a group that is classified as a terrorist organization.
- jacobush 8y ago
  Ok, I can buy that - it's not perfect, but the world is messy. :-/
  - Sebguer 8y ago
    It's also worth noting that it was a suicide bomber attack, which is rarely a facet of conventional warfare.
    - Frondo 8y ago
      Rare, though with one prominent usage in the 40s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamikaze https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamikaze
dmurray 8y ago
The word "terrorist" has been reappropriated, possibly because "guerilla warfare", "asymmetric warfare" etc sound too glamorous. In the US it mostly means any military action by non-state actors against the US and its allies.
- JustSomeNobody 8y ago
  It was re-appropriated because it is easy to get the American people on board with spending bucket loads of money on it. It's a trillion dollar industry, terrorism is. People are getting wealthy off of it. Forget that almost no attacks happen. Forget that more people die each year choking on food. Let's spend money like it's free!
- balabaster 8y ago
  When you say non-state, you surely mean by parties whom aren't favourable to US interests. It's interesting that when a government or party that's not in the US's best interests is in power, it's okay for the CIA to use asymmetric tactics to fund rebels and favourable terrorism, stage coups d'etat, overthrow governments and meddle in foreign elections but when those parties seek to do the same to the US, it's terrorism. Kind of hypocritical really. But that's US exceptionalism for you. It's only bad when someone else does it. It's almost impossible at this point to point a finger and say "there's the bad guy, right there" because both sides are as bad as the other and both using much the same tactics on one another, both spewing rhetoric and hatred in the face of the other terrorists. It's like trying to mediate a kindergarten playground fight where the cost of losing the fight is death instead of being dragged to the principal's office by your ears. It's so undignified it's nauseating.

Shivetya 8y ago

The Navy is still centered around too many overly expensive to build and maintain carrier groups. They had their glory days but tactics pretty force them into only being useful against smaller opponents. They do sure look pretty. Part of this inter service rivalry but part is just its too hard to give up what you are used too. However there was both traction in moving away from that[1] and the old guard coming back for more[2]. They are expensive to put together, twenty billion to thirty billion per task force and hundreds of millions per year just in crew salaries to run. [1] https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2019/01/15/the-us-navy-moves-toward-unleashing-killer-robot-ships-on-the-worlds-oceans/ https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2019/01/15/the-us-navy-mov... [2] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-defense-carriers/u-s-navy-pursuing-block-buy-of-two-aircraft-carriers-senator-idUSKCN1OV189 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-defense-carriers/u-s-...