Trump's military put into perspective

I was just trying to figure out where you get your information and how you managed to misinterpret statements being made by Trump so badly.
I haven't put much effort in his defense of your bogus accusation. My concern is the success of the USA and I'll put a lot of effort in that because it effects myself and my family.

Based on your ranting post, it isn't me who is the one who is biased based on "feelings" as you call it. Perhaps you just 'see' a lot of people defend him because you obsessively attack him. It's a reaction to you and people like you, not a obsession on their part and love of their God King Trump.

 

Assuming you can drop the smugness long enough to consider, consider this. The "Atlantic" is a consistently left-biased publisher. I select that intentionally for this example

Consider the Possibility That Trump Is Right About China
Critics are letting their disdain for the president blind them to geopolitical realities.

April 5, 2020
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/04/consider-possibility-trump-right-china/609493/

When a consistently left publication gives Trump credit for more accurately reading and handling the situation than the democrats, there should be reason for you to revise your conclusions.

 

also because you seem to lack knowledge I will help you out.

businesses use China and outsource labor and materials from China because they have the technology, resources and manpower that no other countries possess at this current time. America does not have the infrastructure, logistical means, or economy to support all businesses to move away from China. Then you mention Mexico, you do realize the hurdles and challenges American firms would face with a corrupted government there as well as intimidation from the cartels?

 

Yes, I agree with Trump. You don't have to pay the tariff. It's your choice. Buy elsewhere if you have a problem paying the tarrifs. All Americans pay in the long run in security and our success as a whole if you buy from China.

Again, like Trump said, "Their is no reason for the U.S. Consumer to pay the Tariffs, which take effect on China today,"

Just buy elsewhere. Not China.

I don't know why it's so difficult for you too understand. It's also interesting how you think the ignorance is mine.

 

He is implying that China would pay for the tariffs not Americans.

Also you say buy from somewhere else like that is an option and there are just all these goods flowing in from other countries. Please add realism to your replies

 

I know this. The goal is to have other countries have that technology and resources available. When the demand shifts, there will be other companies in other places that start up to develop to fulfill that need.
A Tarrif creates a small push in that direction. It's like taxing carbons to increase the demand for green energy. While there isn't enough green energy available currently, it will develop to fulfill the demand. Solar panels will be built because it becomes a little more cost effective when the tax offsets the difference.

 

Look I'm all for having an opinion but I'm not concerned with a subjective article.

What I'm concerned with is how Trump openly praised china and how transparent china is and how they properly handled the virus. That is the problem. But continue I want to hear more of this fantasy you have

 

Do you have the context to support your assertion? Your claim makes no sense. My interpretation does make sense. Yours is highly unlikely.

 

lol yes because trump supporters are always right. You're dismissed I had enough of your lunacy for today

 

What tarrifs are we talking about here, most can be avoided and more can be if we can set the stage and encourage other ally nations to do the same. It's basically a soft economic sanctions on China.

 

With the F35B, the USN LHD ships have as much air combat power as the Chinese supercarriers.

 

Soft sanctions on China? In what way, they don't pay the tariffs, the American importers pay the tariffs and that gets profit added to it and then passed to the American consumers to pay. Please enlighten me how that affects china?

 

Well don't take my interpretation at its face. I asked you to supply the context, the tweets before and after, to determine whose interpretation is correct but instead you resorted toa personal attack.

Here this will help explain what was being said in Trumps tweet.

https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...after-top-aides?amp&__twitter_impression=true
https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...after-top-aides?amp&__twitter_impression=true

 

Again this is a subjective article that is solely based on ones opinion and pulled multiple tweets out of context to conduct their own analysis. I'm not interested in subjective articles

If you have an opinion based on facts or direct words from the president I am willing to listen, but do not give me articles of another persons opinion. That tells me you need someone else to do the thinking for you and you only listen if it fits your narrative

 

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1300533877153378304 (Here’s my hot take on this poll. The military, which is inherently patriotic and tends to run conservative, knows Trump is not strong on defense and NATSEC issues. Thus know the President has failed to make the country safer.)

Here's a tweet that I like it fits my narrative. You should look at it

 

The people of the Armed Forces of the US know the truth: Trump has not rebuilt the military nor has not he made the US safer. In fact no other president has done more to undermine US security. Military members cannot speak out but listen to what they are telling you here.

This is based on the military times newspaper voting that had Biden favored and questionnaires filled out about the candidates

 

That takes time as I assume you would know.

 

ok let me rephrase.

Trump has not attempted to rebuild the military

 

He has increased the budgets significantly after the military was starved for funds thanks to the Obama Admin. (and Republicans in congress who thought sequestration was a good idea).

 

No. You only look for opportunities to mock common sense.

 

Words are hot air- anyone can say anything. People who hate or are angry with their own life issues will always produce some critics of authority, usually directed at whomever is the popular target at the moment.


Here's an opinion from Forbes magazine, written by a person who has involvement and knowledge that probably goes a bit beyond what you do.

Top Five Steps Trump Has Taken To Prepare The U.S. Military For Whatever Comes Next

Loren ThompsonSenior Contributor
Aerospace & Defense
I write about national security, especially its business dimensions.

Last week’s domestic reaction to the killing of Iran’s top military commander was predictably partisan and speculative. Nobody can say for sure what will happen next in the Persian Gulf—just as we don’t know what lies ahead on the Korean Peninsula, in Eastern Europe, or in the Horn of Africa.

In such circumstances, the only prudent posture for America’s military is to be prepared for a diverse array of challenges. That is the vector President Trump put military plans on when he took office. Whatever you may think of Trump the man, he installed a highly capable defense team that systematically addressed military deficiencies inherited from the Obama years.

The Obama Administration badly misread global security trends, failing to anticipate Russia’s military resurgence, the rise of ISIS, and various other challenges. As a result, Washington took a number of steps such as the drawdown of forces in Europe and Iraq that later looked misguided. It fell to Trump to reverse course and revitalize the nation’s defense posture.

He did this first and foremost by increasing defense outlays 25% between 2016 and 2020—an increase in funding greater in size than the entire military budget of any nation other than China. But the president didn’t just throw money at the problem. From its first months in office, the administration always had a plan for recovering ground lost during the Obama years.


An Abrams tank on night maneuvers in November. President Trump's military modernization program ... [+]

Defense Visual Information Distribution Service
Here, in my judgment, are the five most important things the Trump defense team has done.

Increased funding for readiness. On the eve of Trump’s election, the Government Accountability Office reported “persistently low readiness levels” in the joint force, which it attributed to high operating tempo, end-strength reductions, under-funding of training activities, and the departure of seasoned weapons maintainers. Military aircraft accidents increased 40% between 2013 and 2017, signaling a deterioration in pilot skills. Military leaders warned only a fraction of the force was ready to fight effectively on short notice.

Against that backdrop, the Trump Pentagon launched a multiphase process to rebuild the military. In 2017, it would increase spending on readiness. In 2018 it would sustain funding for readiness—training, maintenance, etc.—while filling “holes” in the military posture such as inadequate stocks of precision munitions. In 2019 it would begin making down payments on increased lethality to cope with the challenges posed by Russia and China, and in 2020 it would go full-bore on buying a new generation of weapons. Trump’s team saw it would take years to return to a high state of readiness, and so that’s where its plan began.

Investment in core warfighting systems. When President Trump took office, the U.S. military was suffering from decades of under-investment in new technology. The Air Force’s fleet of bombers, fighters and tankers was the oldest it had ever been. The Army’s helicopters and armored vehicles consisted largely of programs begun during the Reagan years (or earlier). Some warfighting systems had grown so decrepit that the military services were proposing their retirement despite a lack of newer weapons with which to replace them.

The Trump team greatly increased funding for development and procurement of new weapons. Outlays for R&D increased over 50% between 2016 and 2020, while outlays for the procurement of weapons rose 35%. Much of this money was devoted to fielding a new generation of warfighting systems, including a more survivable bomber, longer-range rotorcraft and unmanned systems. But funding was also provided to accelerate upgrades to signature warfighting systems such as the Army’s Abrams tank and the Navy’s Virginia-class attack submarines.

Modernization of nuclear forces. Recapitalization of the nation’s aging nuclear arsenal was the first major military initiative Trump cited when he announced he intended to seek the presidency. Deterring nuclear attacks by sustaining a diverse and survivable retaliatory force has long been the foundation of the U.S. defense posture, but by the time Trump decided to run the entire strategic arsenal had grown old, including its command and control network and its industrial complex. Yet the Obama Administration had repeatedly delayed or deferred investment in new nuclear capabilities.

Following release of a nuclear posture review, the Trump Administration affirmed plans to modernize all three legs of the strategic arsenal—sea-based missiles, land-based missiles and bombers—while making major upgrades to the command network and revitalizing industrial facilities. Unlike President Obama, President Trump has never expressed ambivalence about the need for nuclear weapons, including tactical nuclear weapons that can be carried on F-35 fighters and other weapons to match the shorter-range devices Russia deploys in Europe.

Bolstering resilience in space. In the years since the Cold War ended, U.S. military forces have become heavily dependent on satellites for missile warning, secure communications, intelligence and navigation. For instance, a typical Army brigade contains many hundreds of systems dependent on signals from the Global Positioning System to function effectively. The same is true of smart bombs used by the Air Force and Navy. Seeing how important orbital systems have become to the joint force, Russia and China are developing diverse means for destroying or degrading key space systems in wartime.

The Trump Administration has launched a major effort to increase the resilience of U.S. space assets, which includes making orbital capabilities more survivable, protecting ground systems, and rendering downlinks/uplinks harder to jam or intercept. Much of the new money is going to secret projects such as sophisticated sensor arrays, but the organizational manifestations of increased emphasis on space are easy to see: a sixth branch of the military called the Space Force, a unified command, a dedicated Space Development Agency, and other bureaucratic constructs. President Trump has done more to elevate the priority of national security space activities than any other chief executive.

Pressing allies to do their part. President Trump has not been shy about telling allies they must do more to support collective security. That goes particularly for the European members of NATO, many of whom have stopped thinking rigorously about the military threat posed by Russia. For instance, Germany—one of the world’s biggest economies—spends less in a year on defense than Washington does in a month. The ability of NATO forces to deter or defeat Russian aggression is undermined by this lack of commitment.

Trump has correctly stated that the U.S. gets less from its alliances than overseas partners do even though it pays much more to keep those alliances viable. Some have said this makes him a neo-isolationist. However, the extensive funds provided by the administration for efforts such as the European Deterrence Initiative demonstrate that Trump’s main goal isn’t to withdraw from overseas, but to fashion a collective security posture that assures victory if war occurs.

The above five efforts are just the beginning of what the Trump defense team has done to bolster America’s military since taking office. From hypersonic weapons to multi-domain warfare to soldier lethality, Trump has done more to rebuild U.S. warfighting capabilities than any president since Reagan. It is hard to imagine any of the Democrats currently seeking their party’s presidential nomination pursuing a military agenda that is similarly ambitious.

Several major defense contractors contribute to my think tank. Some are also consulting clients.



…

 

Our July trade imbalance was the highest it's been in 12 years as we had soaring imports from China and Mexico.

 

I get the Air Force Association Daily Report. At the end of the Obama administration, about half the Air Force units were declared non combat ready. The last time I heard that mentioned was around two years ago and the number of combat ready units was above 75%. It is no longer an issue. The other services are similar.

I occasionally talk to other Air Force members and I have not talked to any of them who do not look favorably towards Trump. They are more concerned about their readiness than they are about what Trump may or may not have said about them.

 

Given the Corona virus, that is not surprising. Our industry was nearly shut down in July.

 

lol I served in the military under trump and the polls are from all service members and you post this opinion from someone who does not serve?

Again I would strongly suggest you take advice from those that are apart of the military and not those that analyze the military.