• US Navy warship production hits 25-year low, falls behind China: 'A ter

    From P. Coonan@21:1/5 to All on Mon Aug 12 21:50:56 2024
    XPost: talk.politics.guns, alt.politics.republicans, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh XPost: sac.politics, talk.politics.misc

    Navy shipbuilding has had its worst production in 25 years, putting the US behind rival China in production pace.

    “I don’t see a fast, easy way to get out of this problem. It’s taken us a
    long time to get into it,” Eric Labs, a longtime naval analyst at the Congressional Budget Office, told ABC News, adding that the Navy’s
    shipbuilding was now in “a terrible state.”

    The comments come as last-minute design changes, cost overruns, and an inability to recruit and retain employees to build ships has slowed
    production at the same time the US faces expanding global threats at sea.

    The ABC News report cites a Marinette Marine contract as just one of the
    many examples of the struggles of the Navy to meet production.

    According to the report, the shipmaker is under contract to build six guided-missile frigates with an option to build four more, but with its
    current workforce can only produce one ship per year.

    Issues such as the one faced by Marinette Marine have been widespread throughout the country, with shipyards turning to creative solutions such
    as offering training academies or partnering with technical colleges to
    get more workers the skills they need to build the Navy’s high-tech
    vessels.

    Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro has touted such programs, the report notes,
    even speaking during the commencement for recent graduates at a community college that partnered with Portsmouth Naval Shipyard to teach students to repair nuclear submarines.

    “It is incumbent upon all of us to consider how we can best lend our
    talents and, in the case of the graduates, their newly developed skills,
    to build up our great nation for all Americans, and defend against the
    threats and challenges of today,” he said at the ceremony.

    Part of the $100 million in Navy funding provided to Marinette Marine is
    being used for retention bonuses, underscoring the importance of retaining
    a shipbuilding workforce.

    The report also notes that much of the blame is with the Navy itself,
    which frequently changes the design requirements of ships after companies
    have begun construction.

    Yet despite vows to learn from those mistakes, the Navy redesigned 85% of
    the ships being built by Marinette Marine, resulting in cost increases and delays.

    The report comes after a US Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) slide
    leaked online showed last year that the rapidly expanding Chinese Navy has
    the capacity to produce ships at 200 times the rate of the United States.

    “The Chinese see this decade as a strategic opportunity,” Brent Sadler,
    senior research fellow for naval warfare and advanced technology in the
    Center for National Defense at the Heritage Foundation, told Fox News
    Digital at the time. “I don’t see any near-term bending of the curve where
    we actually start closing the gap with the Chinese.”

    But the Navy said it is taking the problem seriously, with a spokesperson
    for Del Toro telling ABC News that the service is looking for more
    “creative solutions” to the problem.

    “The Navy’s role in defending our nation and promoting peace has never
    been more expansive or mattered more,” said Lt. Kyle Hanton. “We continue
    to work with our industry partners to identify creative solutions to
    solving our common challenges.”

    The Navy did not immediately respond to a Fox News Digital request for
    comment.

    Conversation

    Kevin Parlato
    23 hours ago

    I think that our shipbuilding capacity has gone down due to not having a diverse, equitable, and inclusive workplace, and management teams in
    place. Clearly the Chinese are decades ahead of us in their DEI hiring practices.

    Terry Nongiven
    23 hours ago

    You're not far off. Newport News Shipbuilding has shifted to a huge
    emphasis on DEI and that may very matter more than "Are you a good welder"
    when it is replaced with "Are you MINORITY that would like a job welding"
    that is an unnecessary burden placed upon our companies - but POLITICS
    wins shipbuilding contracts!

    Michael Vaughn
    22 hours ago

    China will fear our Lipstick Brigade...

    Terry Nongiven
    23 hours ago

    I proudly served in Ronald Reagan's 600 ship navy!

    Vietnam had a detrimental effect on the Nation's look upon the military
    and I come from a line of Navy veterans. While I was in High school -
    President Carter was President, and he had no head for meeting the Soviet challenge head on, so he did NOTHING to rebuild our our forces.

    President Reagan was determined to meet the Soviet challenge head on and promised to build a 600 ship Navy (He did it too) and as he predicted,
    with America willing to stand up - the Soviet Union ended up on "The ash
    heap of history".

    President Reagan - Greatest President of the 20th Century!

    https://nypost.com/2024/08/11/us-news/us-navy-warship-production-hits-25- year-low-falls-behind-china-a-terrible-state/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From 186283@ud0s4.net@21:1/5 to P. Coonan on Mon Aug 12 19:02:27 2024
    XPost: alt.politics.republicans, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, sac.politics
    XPost: talk.politics.misc

    On 8/12/24 5:50 PM, P. Coonan wrote:
    Navy shipbuilding has had its worst production in 25 years, putting the US behind rival China in production pace.

    “I don’t see a fast, easy way to get out of this problem. It’s taken us a
    long time to get into it,” Eric Labs, a longtime naval analyst at the Congressional Budget Office, told ABC News, adding that the Navy’s shipbuilding was now in “a terrible state.”

    The comments come as last-minute design changes, cost overruns, and an inability to recruit and retain employees to build ships has slowed production at the same time the US faces expanding global threats at sea.


    Well, sheer VOLUME isn't necessarily everything ...
    quality, capability, count more - up to a point.

    It is said the shiny new Chinese fleet IS pretty
    capable, all the latest tech. This makes any
    serious imbalance in numbers more serious. The
    Chinese commanders and crew may, or may not, be
    any good ... won't know until, and that's a bad
    time to find out.

    I'd also have concerns that China may have some
    neat-o tech WE don't - like autonomous attack
    drones. That'd complicate things.

    In any case, western nations are not nearly as
    rich as they used to be. One Brit general said
    the UK had about enough ammo to fight Russia
    for ONE day - and insofar as UK ship-building
    it looks like their big shiny new carrier is
    such trash it may have to BE trashed.

    The USA lives in DeficitLand too. That's how
    it's all devolved since WW2 and we're kinda
    stuck with the situation. A dozen Trumps could
    not rectify this mess - too deep, too wide,
    too 'systemic'. It'll all hold together by
    whatever tricks for as long as it does.

    Hmmm ... if we stuck to real money, the USA
    would have stalled out somewhere in the early
    to mid 70s ... 1776 to 1976 and not much
    'modernization' thereafter.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Siri Cruise@21:1/5 to P. Coonan on Tue Aug 13 19:21:56 2024
    XPost: talk.politics.guns, alt.politics.republicans, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh XPost: sac.politics, talk.politics.misc

    P. Coonan wrote:
    Navy shipbuilding has had its worst production in 25 years, putting the US behind rival China in production pace.

    So fucking what. Our Navy size should be what our country needs,
    not keeping up with Jones.

    --
    Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. @
    'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
    The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 3.2 / \
    of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J Carlson@21:1/5 to Governor Swill on Wed Aug 14 22:38:15 2024
    XPost: talk.politics.guns, Oh.no.this.most.certainly.is.NOT.going.to.alt.politics.republicans, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
    XPost: sac.politics, talk.politics.misc

    On 8/14/2024 10:14 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
    On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 19:21:56 -0700, Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote:

    P. Coonan wrote:
    Navy shipbuilding has had its worst production in 25 years, putting the US >>> behind rival China in production pace.

    So fucking what. Our Navy size should be what our country needs,
    not keeping up with Jones.

    We've got the Gerald Ford, they've got the Graf Spee.

    I'm not worried.

    The type of ships we're lacking are not what we need to counter China.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris Ahlstrom@21:1/5 to Governor Swill on Thu Aug 15 08:10:04 2024
    XPost: talk.politics.guns, Oh.no.this.most.certainly.is.NOT.going.to.alt.politics.republicans, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
    XPost: sac.politics, talk.politics.misc

    Governor Swill wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

    On Wed, 14 Aug 2024 22:38:15 -0700, J Carlson <j_carlson@gmx.com> wrote:

    On 8/14/2024 10:14 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
    On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 19:21:56 -0700, Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote:

    P. Coonan wrote:
    Navy shipbuilding has had its worst production in 25 years, putting the US
    behind rival China in production pace.

    So fucking what. Our Navy size should be what our country needs,
    not keeping up with Jones.

    We've got the Gerald Ford, they've got the Graf Spee.

    I'm not worried.

    The type of ships we're lacking are not what we need to counter China.

    They have more ships, we have more tonnage. Our technology is newer and more advanced, theirs is based on old Soviet tech. We two things they don't: Centuries of naval experience and success, and allies.

    Actually, the development of new Navy ships seems to be foundering. For example:

    The Navy originally planned to build 32 Zumwalts, but the number was
    reduced to 24 and then to eight due to cost. The average construction cost
    per ship increased to $4.24 billion, which was more than the cost of a
    nuclear-powered Virginia-class submarine. The total program cost was $22.5
    billion in April 2016, which was $7.5 billion per ship.

    I'll let your curiosity lead you to online references.

    --
    Q: What do little WASPs want to be when they grow up?
    A: The very best person they can possibly be.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gronk@21:1/5 to All on Thu Aug 22 23:58:05 2024
    XPost: talk.politics.guns, alt.politics.republicans, Oh.no.this.most.certainly.is.NOT.going.to.alt.politics.republicans
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, talk.politics.misc

    Twenty five year low? Eight years of Bush, four
    of #FelonDon... They did nothing? Aren't they
    sposeta be big on this stuff?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Chris Ahlstrom@21:1/5 to Gronk on Fri Aug 23 07:55:43 2024
    XPost: talk.politics.guns, alt.politics.republicans, Oh.no.this.most.certainly.is.NOT.going.to.alt.politics.republicans
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, talk.politics.misc

    Gronk wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

    Twenty five year low? Eight years of Bush, four
    of #FelonDon... They did nothing? Aren't they
    sposeta be big on this stuff?

    To be honest, a lot of the delays and cost overruns are due to constant requirements creep, requirements churn, and design changes.

    A project gets started, and months go by as the scope of the project expands
    at weekly meetings.

    --
    It has long been an axiom of mine that the little things are infinitely
    the most important.
    -- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, "A Case of Identity"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Skeeter@21:1/5 to All on Fri Aug 23 07:08:19 2024
    XPost: talk.politics.guns, alt.politics.republicans, Oh.no.this.most.certainly.is.NOT.going.to.alt.politics.republicans
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, talk.politics.misc

    In article <va98de$qb0b$6@dont-email.me>, invalide@invalid.invalid
    says...

    Twenty five year low? Eight years of Bush, four
    of #FelonDon... They did nothing? Aren't they
    sposeta be big on this stuff?

    What is the left going to do on "day one" that they can't do now?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Khil Philed@21:1/5 to Chris Ahlstrom on Fri Aug 23 22:27:37 2024
    XPost: talk.politics.guns, alt.politics.republicans, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh XPost: talk.politics.misc

    Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote in news:va9tc0$t02p$9@dont-email.me:

    Gronk wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

    Twenty five year low? Eight years of Bush, four
    of #FelonDon... They did nothing? Aren't they
    sposeta be big on this stuff?

    To be honest, a lot of the delays and cost overruns are due to
    constant requirements creep, requirements churn, and design changes.

    A project gets started, and months go by as the scope of the project
    expands at weekly meetings.

    That's absolutely true. A ship can change a lot from the initial
    design concepts depending on many factors. Look at what happened with
    the littoral ships.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Juergen Nieveler@21:1/5 to Governor Swill on Mon Aug 26 14:14:20 2024
    XPost: talk.politics.guns, alt.politics.republicans, Oh.no.this.most.certainly.is.NOT.going.to.alt.politics.republicans
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, talk.politics.misc

    Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:

    The Navy has settled on Frigates and Destroyers instead of heavier
    ships

    Mind you, what passes for a destroyer today would have been called a
    cruiser as late as the 1960s... and as for frigates, they've grown so
    large, the upcoming German F-127 is supposed to be 160m long and with
    10000 tons displacement.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From 186283@ud0s4.net@21:1/5 to Juergen Nieveler on Tue Aug 27 03:59:54 2024
    XPost: alt.defense, alt.politics.usa, alt.elections
    XPost: alt.military

    On 8/26/24 9:14 AM, Juergen Nieveler wrote:
    Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:

    The Navy has settled on Frigates and Destroyers instead of heavier
    ships

    Mind you, what passes for a destroyer today would have been called a
    cruiser as late as the 1960s... and as for frigates, they've grown so
    large, the upcoming German F-127 is supposed to be 160m long and with
    10000 tons displacement.

    The equation changes, constantly. We used to build
    lots of battleships, then carriers ... NOW it looks
    like large volumes of smaller missile/drone boats
    might be much better.

    Frankly, these days, a big ship is a BIG EXPENSIVE
    TARGET. All sorts of systems that can take one out
    and then you've lost HUGE assets. MUCH harder to
    deal with 100 'hornets' instead ...

    Future Navy ... not all that many humans - lots of
    various drones and such. Evolution. The age of
    the glorious charging knights seems to be over
    for better or worse. "Terminators" from now on.
    Last one to catch on to that LOSES.

    Just sayin'

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From 186283@ud0s4.net@21:1/5 to Khil Philed on Thu Aug 29 01:22:30 2024
    XPost: talk.politics.guns, alt.politics.republicans, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh XPost: talk.politics.misc

    On 8/23/24 6:27 PM, Khil Philed wrote:
    Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote in news:va9tc0$t02p$9@dont-email.me:

    Gronk wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

    Twenty five year low? Eight years of Bush, four
    of #FelonDon... They did nothing? Aren't they
    sposeta be big on this stuff?

    To be honest, a lot of the delays and cost overruns are due to
    constant requirements creep, requirements churn, and design changes.

    A project gets started, and months go by as the scope of the project
    expands at weekly meetings.

    That's absolutely true. A ship can change a lot from the initial
    design concepts depending on many factors. Look at what happened with
    the littoral ships.


    However mods post-contract push prices up a LOT ...
    and this is a fiscal/political PROBLEM.

    Alas, times/tech change more RAPIDLY these days.
    Something specced 5+ years ago may NOT be what
    you NEED today. Dunno if there's a fix. More
    'modular' initial design ???

    REALLY, we need a fix !

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From 186283@ud0s4.net@21:1/5 to Gronk on Thu Aug 29 01:17:15 2024
    XPost: alt.politics.republicans, alt.politics.republicans, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
    XPost: talk.politics.misc

    On 8/23/24 1:58 AM, Gronk wrote:

    Twenty five year low? Eight years of Bush, four
    of #FelonDon... They did nothing? Aren't they
    sposeta be big on this stuff?

    Well, US presidents are not god-emperors ... they
    have to get OTHER branches of gov to go along with
    the program .....

    And yes it DID go to alt.politics.republicans
    ya smelly little WokieCom ........

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gronk@21:1/5 to Skeeter on Fri Aug 30 23:15:29 2024
    XPost: talk.politics.guns, alt.politics.republicans, Oh.no.this.most.certainly.is.NOT.going.to.alt.politics.republicans
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, talk.politics.misc

    Skeeter wrote:
    In article <va98de$qb0b$6@dont-email.me>, invalide@invalid.invalid
    says...

    Twenty five year low? Eight years of Bush, four
    of #FelonDon... They did nothing? Aren't they
    sposeta be big on this stuff?

    What is the left going to do on "day one" that they can't do now?


    Why didn't the magats do something day one eight
    years ago?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rudy Canoza@21:1/5 to Governor Swill on Sat Aug 31 10:37:18 2024
    XPost: Oh.no.this.most.certainly.is.NOT.going.to.alt.politics.republicans, Oh.no.this.most.certainly.is.NOT.going.to.alt.politics.trump, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
    XPost: talk.politics.misc

    On 8/31/2024 2:02 AM, Governor Swill wrote:
    On Sat, 31 Aug 2024 02:59:19 -0400, "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote:

    On 8/31/24 1:15 AM, Gronk wrote:
    Skeeter wrote:
    In article <va98de$qb0b$6@dont-email.me>, invalide@invalid.invalid
    says...

    Twenty five year low? Eight years of Bush, four
    of #FelonDon... They did nothing? Aren't they
    sposeta be big on this stuff?

    What is the left going to do on "day one" that they can't do now?


    Why didn't the magats do something day one eight
    years ago?

    Because politicians, our 'leaders', DON'T DO SHIT
    unless it boosts their re-election bids. More money
    to the mil - NOT. More money for trannies and
    Venezuelan thugs - YES.

    Oh, bullshit. The military budget always goes up. Obama was just one Democrat
    who took heat from his far left wing for high military spending.

    As for "trannies" and "thugs", still more hysterical right wing bullshit.

    This playing on people's fears is getting old. Stop pretending you're going to
    save them from some horrible social problem and come up the policy that will solve the REAL problems people face every day.

    Plato commented on the problems with 'democracy'
    thousands of years ago. It CAN go totally bad.
    It's systemic, inherent to the paradigm. Not
    sure there's much "better", but STILL .....

    Oh, fixed the groups for you so it WILL go
    to alt.politics.republicans as intended :-)

    You're a stupid git. apr was never removed. Here's the list that Gronk got and
    replied to.
    Newsgroups: sci.military.naval,talk.politics.guns,alt.politics.republicans,Oh.no.this.most.certainly.is.NOT.going.to.alt.politics.republicans,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc

    As you can see, apr was *already in the list*. What you removed wasn't some mysterious, embedded Usenet command, it was an invented newsgroup that some troll put in way back. I routinely remove Oh.no.this.most.certainly.is.NOT.going. ... groups when I reply.

    They also use several similar groups such as Oh.no.this.most.certainly.is.NOT.going.to.alt.politics.democrats or Oh.no.this.most.certainly.is.NOT.going.to.talk.politics.guns

    I'm the one who changes followups to Oh.no.this.most.certainly.is.NOT.going.to..., and I do it for a couple of very good reasons. The first is that shitbag right-wingnuts, and *only* shitbag right-wingnuts, are constantly cross-posting their vomit to newsgroups where it is inappropriate and offensive, e.g. alt.computer.workshop and comp.os.linux.advocacy. That vile neo-Nazi shitbag fainéant AlleyPussyBitch constantly cross-posts his hate spew to can.politics. Canadians are fundamentally decent people — far more decent than average Americans — and there's no legitimate reason for that cocksucker to be going out of his way to be offensive to them. So I /could/ just remove the inappropriate newsgroups from
    my followups, but I much prefer to alter the newsgroups to let the shitbags like
    AlleyPussyBitch know that my reply is not going to the groups they're trying to pollute. And if you look at one of AlleyPussyBitch's replies to me, you can tell
    that it *bugs* him when I do that.

    The second reason I do it is that I use two Usenet providers (one paid, one free), and if I'm not subscribed to all the newsgroups in the followups for both
    providers, I can't send the post. So I could make all the subscriptions match, *or* I could remove the newsgroups from the followups that are not common to both sets of subscriptions, but then see point #1 above. I *like* offending vile
    shitbags like AlleyPussyBitch.


    Get a grip on reality, Numbers. You lost it today.

    Too bad you're a chicken shit who has me killfiled; you might learn something once in a while instead of continually reinforcing your own ignorance and bigotry.


    Oh. My. God.
    MUST see this illusionist's magic trick. Turning a man into a dog on stage. <https://www.youtube.com/shorts/AvGVGeN9Mv8> (Video less than 60 seconds)


    --
    #NEVERtrump

    --
    Every Republiscum/QAnon accusation is, in fact, a confession

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From 186283@ud0s4.net@21:1/5 to Juergen Nieveler on Sat Aug 31 22:32:01 2024
    XPost: talk.politics.misc, alt.politics.eu, alt.elections

    On 8/26/24 9:14 AM, Juergen Nieveler wrote:
    Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:

    The Navy has settled on Frigates and Destroyers instead of heavier
    ships

    Mind you, what passes for a destroyer today would have been called a
    cruiser as late as the 1960s... and as for frigates, they've grown so
    large, the upcoming German F-127 is supposed to be 160m long and with
    10000 tons displacement.


    Big fat high-value TARGETS

    The "hornet's nest" model IS better for this century.
    Lots of small, many semi/fully-autonomous, ships carrying
    nothing but drones and missiles.

    'Leaders' and military like "big" - makes them feel
    all manly and such. But it's the WRONG approach given
    the emerging technology. We don't build battleships
    anymore for GOOD REASONS. This will soon extend to
    aircraft carriers and other huge ships.

    And if not ... we LOSE.

    So, who to elect ... who will have the BALLS and
    insight to force the needed changes ?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From D. Ray@21:1/5 to 186282@ud0s4.net on Tue Sep 17 06:51:40 2024
    XPost: talk.politics.misc, alt.politics.eu, alt.elections

    186282@ud0s4.net <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
    On 8/26/24 9:14 AM, Juergen Nieveler wrote:
    Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:

    The Navy has settled on Frigates and Destroyers instead of heavier
    ships

    Mind you, what passes for a destroyer today would have been called a
    cruiser as late as the 1960s... and as for frigates, they've grown so
    large, the upcoming German F-127 is supposed to be 160m long and with
    10000 tons displacement.


    Big fat high-value TARGETS

    The "hornet's nest" model IS better for this century.
    Lots of small, many semi/fully-autonomous, ships carrying
    nothing but drones and missiles.

    Who’s going to build it? Boeing? I mean, they can’t build planes anymore, so why not ships?

    'Leaders' and military like "big" - makes them feel
    all manly and such. But it's the WRONG approach given
    the emerging technology. We don't build battleships
    anymore for GOOD REASONS. This will soon extend to
    aircraft carriers and other huge ships.

    And if not ... we LOSE.

    You already lost.

    <https://www.businessinsider.com/us-navy-chinas-shipbuilding-capacity-200-times-greater-than-us-2023-9>

    So, who to elect ... who will have the BALLS and
    insight to force the needed changes ?

    No one. There’s no one in American politics who is willing to say “no” to Wall Street and actually start making necessary changes. Trump won’t do it, either. He’ll do the same shit he did last time.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)