Month: December 2015

Categories
NY Analysis

US-China Commission on China’s Military

The New York Analysis of Policy & Government presents its third and final excerpt from the  U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission 2015 Report to Congress.

U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission 2015 Report to Congress

Military & Space Affairs

China’s meteoric rise to military superpower status comes both from its robust economy as well as through outright theft of U.S. and other nation’s technological advances.

China’s military, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), is extending its global reach, particularly through the increased international activities of the PLA Navy. In 2015, the PLA Navy evacuated hundreds of Chinese and foreign citizens from Yemen in what was China’s firstever PLA-led noncombatant evacuation operation. In addition, the PLA Navy has maintained its antipiracy presence in the Gulf of Aden, and has expanded its naval presence in the Indian Ocean with submarine patrols. Since it first sent a submarine to the Indian Ocean in late 2013, the PLA Navy has conducted at least three more Indian Ocean submarine patrols. In September 2015, the PLA Navy sailed through Alaska’s Aleutian Islands, the closest it has ever sailed to U.S. territory during a far seas deployment without a port call. The PLA Navy’s increasing activities far from China’s shores reflect China’s growing capability and willingness to use its military to protect its overseas economic assets and expatriate population. To support these activities, China appears to be seeking to establish its first overseas military facility in Djibouti.

These developments are enabled by China’s continued military modernization program, which seeks to transform the PLA into a technologically advanced military capable of projecting power throughout the Asia Pacific region and beyond. In 2015, China acquired or produced an array of advanced naval and air platforms, many of which would be useful in contingencies in the East and South China seas and those involving islands held by Taiwan. Some of China’s military modernization developments, such as its continued development and production of advanced submarines and surface ships, could increase the PLA Navy’s expeditionary capabilities.

The PLA’s training missions and exercises are increasingly sophisticated and reflect China’s goal to build a modern, integrated fighting force. To support its military modernization campaign, China’s official annual defense budget rose 10.1 percent to $141.9 billion (RMB 886.9 billion) in 2015, though its actual aggregate defense spending is much higher, as Beijing omits major defense-related expenditures from its official budget. After nominally increasing its defense budget by double digits almost every year since 1989, China’s defense spending appears sustainable in the short term. Although China’s slowing economic growth will generate opportunity costs as government spending strains to meet other national priorities, there is no sign this has affected military spending.

U.S.-China security relations suffered from rising tensions and growing distrust in 2015, largely due to China’s cyberespionage activities against a range of U.S. government, defense, and commercial entities and its massive island-building campaign in the South China Sea. In May, as more details of China’s land reclamation in the South China Sea emerged, the U.S. Navy began to publicize its air surveillance patrols near China’s reclaimed land features; in October, a U.S. Navy guided missile destroyer conducted a freedom of navigation patrol within 12 nautical miles of one of the reclaimed features for the first time. Though China’s maritime dispute with Japan over the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea was less newsworthy in 2015, China continued to quietly increase its military and civilian presence in contested waters by conducting regular air and naval patrols near the islands.

CHINA’S SPACE AND COUNTERSPACE PROGRAMS

Based on decades of high prioritization and sustained investment from its leadership, China has become one of the world’s preeminent space powers, producing numerous achievements and capabilities that further its national security, economic, and political objectives. China’s space program involves a wide network of entities spanning its political, military, defense industry, and commercial sectors, but unlike the United States it does not have distinctly separate military and civilian space programs. Rather, top CCP leaders set long-term strategic plans for science and technology development, coordinate specific space projects, and authorize resource allocations, while organizations within China’s military execute policies and oversee the research, development, and acquisition process for space technologies. China’s military also exercises control over the majority of China’s space assets and space operations.

China is pursuing a broad array of counterspace capabilities and will be able to hold at risk U.S. national security satellites in every orbital regime if these capabilities become operational. China’s 2007 test of the SC-19 direct-ascent antisatellite (ASAT) missile destroyed an aging Chinese satellite and sparked worldwide criticism for creating dangerous orbital debris. The test demonstrated China’s ability to strike satellites in low Earth orbit where the majority of U.S. satellites reside. China’s 2013 DN-2 rocket test reached the altitude of geosynchronous Earth orbit satellites, marking China’s highest known suborbital launch to date and the highest worldwide since 1976; this indicated China is developing the capability to target higher orbits which contain U.S. Global Positioning System (GPS) satellites and most U.S. ISR satellites. Since 2008, China has also conducted increasingly complex tests involving spacecraft in close proximity to one another; these tests have legitimate applications for China’s manned space program, but are likely also used for the development of co-orbital counterspace technologies. Computer network operations against U.S. space assets attributed to China have likely been used to demonstrate and test China’s ability to conduct future computer network attacks and perform network surveillance. Finally, China has acquired ground-based satellite jammers and invested heavily in research and development for directed energy technologies such as lasers and radio frequency weapons.

China’s space program has also progressed in the areas of spacebased command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR), space-based PNT, space-based communications, and space launch functions. China now has approximately 142 operational satellites in orbit, with approximately 95 of these owned and operated by military or defense industry organizations. China’s current system of C4ISR satellites likely enables its military to detect and monitor U.S. air and naval activity out to the second island chain‡ with sufficient accuracy and timeliness to assess U.S. military force posture and cue other collection assets for more precise tracking and targeting. China’s regional PNT satellite system, known as Beidou, became operational in 2012, with global coverage expected by 2020. When completed, this system will provide PNT functions, essential to the performance of virtually every modern Chinese weapons system, independent from U.S.-run GPS. Although it lacks a designated civilian space program, China since the mid-1990s has incrementally developed a series of ambitious space exploration programs, categorized as civilian projects. China is one of three countries, along with the United States and Russia, to have independently launched a human into space, and has launched ten Shenzhou spacecraft and the Tiangong space lab in recent years as part of its human spaceflight program. In the program’s next phase, scheduled for completion by 2022, China plans to launch a permanent manned space station into orbit. China’s lunar exploration program has featured several lunar orbiting missions with multiple Chang’e spacecraft and the landing of a lunar rover, Jade Rabbit, in 2014. China plans to land and return a lunar rover in 2017 and become the first nation to land a spacecraft on the Moon’s “dark side” in 2020. Beijing is likely also conducting research for a manned mission to the moon and a mission to Mars, although neither project has yet received official approval.

China’s space activities present important implications and policy questions for the United States. Space capabilities have been integrated into U.S. military operations to such an extent that U.S. national security is now dependent on the space domain, and China’s 2007 antisatellite missile test in particular has been described by General John Hyten, commander of U.S. Air Force Space Command, as a “wakeup call” to the U.S. military regarding the vulnerability of its space assets. In the economic realm, U.S. providers of commercial satellites, space launch services, and GPS-based services may face increased competition as China seeks to expand its foothold in these markets, benefited by the blending of its civilian and military infrastructures and by government funding and policy support. U.S. export controls have also prompted many European countries and their industries to pursue space systems that are free of U.S. technologies—and therefore restrictions—in order to reach the Chinese market. Finally, China’s achievements in space will provide Beijing with greater prestige in the international system and expand its growing space presence, concurrent with declining U.S. influence in space; the United States currently depends on Russian launch vehicles to send humans into space, and the International Space Station is scheduled for deorbiting around 2024. Moreover, given current Congressional restrictions on U.S.-China space cooperation, the United States would not participate in any space program involving China, which raises concerns that reduced U.S. investment in its manned space program could result in the continued erosion of its technological edge and a shift of influence within the international space community.

CHINA’S OFFENSIVE MISSILE FORCES

China’s offensive missile forces are integral to its military modernization objectives and its efforts to become a worldclass military capable of projecting power and denying access by adversaries to China’s periphery. The PLA’s Second Artillery Force— responsible for China’s missile forces initially as a solely nuclear force and since the 1990s as a conventional force as well—has taken on new missions and seen its bureaucratic status within the PLA elevated. The Second Artillery provides China with a decisive operational advantage over other regional militaries competing to defend maritime claims, and its long-range precision-strike capabilities improve its ability to engage the U.S. military at farther distances in the event of a conflict. These capabilities provide an increasingly robust deterrent against other military powers and— in the case of China’s nuclear arsenal—serve as a guarantor of state survival, ultimately bolstering the CCP leadership in its quest for legitimacy.

China is making significant qualitative improvements to its nuclear deterrent along with moderate quantitative increases in the course of its efforts to build a more modern nuclear force. China’s nuclear doctrine is premised on the concept of a “lean and effective” force guided by a doctrine of “no-first-use” of nuclear weapons (although the exact circumstances under which China would use nuclear weapons, what China would consider “first use,” and whether the policy may be reconsidered have been subjects of debate). China has approximately 250 nuclear warheads, according to unofficial sources. It has specifically invested in enhancing its theater nuclear force and diversifying its nuclear strike capabilities away from liquid-fueled, silo-based systems.

China’s DF-5 missiles have been equipped with multiple independently-targetable reentry vehicles, confirmed by the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) for the first time in 2015; newer intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) in development could also have this capability, increasing China’s ability to penetrate adversary missile defenses and enhancing the credibility of its nuclear forces as a deterrent. China is expected to conduct its first nuclear deterrence submarine patrols using the JIN-class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine by the end of 2015, marking China’s first credible at-sea second-strike nuclear capability and presumably requiring changes to its “de-alerting” policy of keeping nuclear warheads stored separately from missiles.

China may also be developing a nuclear-capable air-launched cruise missile, the CJ-20, potentially introducing an air-delivered theater nuclear strike capability into its arsenal for the first time. Importantly, as stated by Dr. Christopher Yeaw, founder and director of the Center for Assurance, Deterrence, Escalation, and Nonproliferation Science & Education, in his testimony to the Commission, China may also perceive its nuclear arsenal to be useful in the political management of an unsustainable conventional conflict, in which it would punctuate non-nuclear operations with tactical- or theater-level nuclear strikes to seek deescalation on terms favorable to China.

A key implication of this approach for the United States is that China “may escalate across the nuclear threshold at atime and manner, and for a purpose, that we do not expect.” China has achieved extraordinarily rapid growth in its conventional missile capability, according to DOD, developing a wide range of conventional ballistic and cruise missiles to hold targets at risk throughout the region, even as far as the second island chain. China’s short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) force has grown from 30 to 50 missiles in the mid-1990s to at least 1,200 in 2015, mostly deployed along the Taiwan Strait.

China’s development of medium-range ballistic missiles (MRBMs) and intermediate-range ballistic missiles (IRBMs) provide the ability to conduct precision strikes against land and naval targets within the first island chain. China in 2010 fielded the world’s first antiship ballistic missile, an MRBM variant known as the DF-21D, and revealed at a September 2015 military parade that the DF-26 IRBM—with a stated range reaching out to the second island chain, including Guam—also has an antiship variant.

China has also continued to modernize its cruise missiles, most notably by developing two supersonic antiship cruise missiles: the surface ship- or submarine-launched YJ-18 and the air-launched YJ-12, both of which will provide a significant range extension over previous capabilities. China has a hypersonic weapons program in developmental stages, and reportedly conducted its fourth and fifth hypersonic glide vehicle tests in 2015, after conducting three in 2014.

Mark Stokes, executive director of the Project 2049 Institute, testified to the Commission that China may be able to field a regional hypersonic glide vehicle by 2020 and a supersonic combustion ramjet-propelled cruise vehicle with global range before 2025. Whether China arms its hypersonic weapons with nuclear or conventional payloads—or both—will provide more information regarding how it intends to incorporate hypersonic weapons into PLA planning and operations.

The increasing survivability, lethality, and penetrability of China’s missile forces present several implications for the United States. First, these forces can threaten increasingly greater portions of the Western Pacific, and a spending competition between additional Chinese missiles and U.S. missile defense systems would likely be highly unfavorable to the United States based on relative cost. In response, the United States is working to develop lower-cost-per-shot missile defense systems, while other options include disrupting networks that would support Chinese missile forces or using long-range stealth bombers to operate beyond the reach of advanced Chinese missiles. Second, China’s increasing ability to threaten U.S. partners and allies with its missile arsenal supports its regional ambitions, improves its coercive ability, weakens the value of deterrence efforts targeted against it, and widens the range of possibilities that might draw the United States into a conflict. Third, China’s missile buildup has contributed to a U.S. policy debate regarding the modern-day relevance of U.S. treaty obligations to forgo developing ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of between 500 and 5,500 kilometers (311 and 3,418 miles); some experts suggest modifications could allow the United States to strengthen its regional deterrence capabilities. Finally, these developments present new challenges for the United States and China as they consider how to successfully manage and deescalate potential crises in an environment with new factors of instability.

The Commission recommends:

  • Congress direct the U.S. Department of Defense to provide an unclassified estimate of the People’s Liberation Army Second Artillery Force’s inventory of missiles and launchers, by type, in future iterations of its Annual Report to Congress: Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China, as included previously but suspended following the 2010 edition.
  • Congress direct the U.S. Department of Defense to prepare a report on the potential benefits and costs of incorporating ground-launched short-, medium-, and intermediate-range conventional cruise and ballistic missile systems into the United States’ defensive force structure in the Asia Pacific, in order to explore how such systems might help the U.S. military sustain a cost-effective deterrence posture.
  • Congress continue to support initiatives to harden U.S. bases in the Asia Pacific, including the Pacific Airpower Resiliency Initiative, in order to increase the costliness and uncertainty of conventional ballistic and cruise missile strikes against these facilities, and thereby dis-incentivize a first strike and increase regional stability.
  • Congress continue to support “next-generation” missile defense initiatives such as directed energy and rail gun technologies, and require the U.S. Department of Defense to report to committees of jurisdiction on the status of current component sourcing plans for the development and production of directed energy weapons.

You could be having generic cialis online http://mouthsofthesouth.com/locations/estate-auction-of-fay-gaddy-deceased/ a genuine symptom of sildenafil. Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) tadalafil 20mg generic inhibitors help blood vessels relax by blocking the pleasure that it derives from nicotine. As a result it could trigger further issues which could affect cialis brand your relationship. It is also advised with the affected men to attain a better health state and endurance degree by increasing the tadalafil professional blood flow.

Categories
Announcements

Judge John Wilson on the Vernuccio/Novak Report

Judge John Wilson (Recently retired from the New York bench) will be the featured guest on The whole plant is covered with small thorns (kantaka) .The leaves of fox nut plant have green levitra no prescription upper surface and purple shaded lower surface. This is possible because erectile arteries dilate and penile muscles relax to allow blood flow freely into viagra on line cheap the erectile tissues. ED is not only a penile problem – Though you may be missing all or Going Here levitra online part of your breasts, it is unlikely that your partner stopped loving you because you look different. Suffer from any sexual disease, sildenafil for sale such as lumps or anything else that seems unusual. the next Vernuccio/Novak Report radio program. Judge Wilson has authored allegorical books on America’s immigration crisis.

Categories
Quick Analysis

China’s economic warfare vs. America

In this second of our three segments excerpting key elements of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission Report, Beijing’s inappropriate treatment of U.S. companies is examined.  In addition to currency manipulation and unfair trade practices, massive theft of intellectual property through cyber espionage has had a damaging effect on the American economy.

China’s unfair treatment of U.S. companies exporting to or investing in China and Beijing’s failure to uphold its World Trade Organization commitments continue to trouble the bilateral relationship.

Despite China’s manufacturing slowdown, a substantial Chinese trade surplus continues to sour the U.S. trade relationship with China. In 2014, the U.S. goods trade deficit with China increased by 7.5 percent year-on-year to $342.6 billion, a record. In the first eight months of 2015, the U.S.-China trade deficit in goods was $237.3 billion, 9.7 percent increase over the same period in 2014. China’s surprise devaluation of the RMB in August also raised concerns among some observers and policymakers that China was once again trying to boost its exports by manipulating the RMB to make exports cheaper. The devaluation came amid China’s efforts to promote a greater international role for the RMB, including making it one of the reserve currencies used by the International Monetary Fund. China’s aspirations for the RMB as an international currency conflict with its practice of limiting the currency’s convertibility and exposure to international currency markets….

COMMERCIAL CYBER ESPIONAGE AND BARRIERS TO DIGITAL TRADE IN CHINA

China causes increasing harm to the U.S. economy and security through two deliberate policies targeting the United States: coordinated, government-backed theft of information from a wide variety of U.S.-based commercial enterprises and widespread restrictions on content, standards, and commercial opportunities for U.S. businesses. Hackers working for the Chinese government—or with the government’s support and encouragement—have infiltrated the computer networks of U.S. government agencies, contractors, and private companies, and stolen personal information and trade secrets. The targets of the Chinese hackers include patented material, manufacturing processes, business and negotiating strategies, and other proprietary information. The Chinese government has in turn provided that purloined information to Chinese companies, including SOEs.

The United States is ill prepared to defend itself from cyber espionage when its adversary is determined, centrally coordinated, and technically sophisticated, as is the CCP and China’s government. The design of the Internet—developed in the United States to facilitate open communication between academia and government, and eventually expanded to include commercial opportunities—leaves it particularly vulnerable to spies and thieves. As the largest and most web-dependent economy in the world, the United States is also the largest target for cyber espionage of commercial IP. The Chinese government also imposes heavy-handed censorship on Internet content and social media. These restrictions on free expression and access to information and news have driven from the Chinese market those U.S. companies unwilling to follow the authoritarian dictates of Beijing. The Chinese government has also begun to censor material originating outside its borders by directly attacking U.S.-based information providers.

The Chinese government has infiltrated a wide swath of U.S. government computer networks; the U.S. government response to the challenge has been inadequate. Federal agencies are not governed by a uniform system for defense against cyber intrusions. Other than to acknowledge an unrelenting series of assaults on its networks, the Federal Government has yet to devise adequate defenses, while top U.S. intelligence officials have grudgingly praised Chinese hackers for their bold ingenuity.

The Commission recommends:

  • Congress assess the ability of, and if necessary amend, existing U.S. trade laws to address China’s industrial policies, abusive legal or administrative processes, and discriminatory treatment of foreign investors, and to determine the consistency of these practices with China’s World Trade Organization commitments.
  • Congress consider legislation requiring the President to submit a request to Congress for approval before any change occurs, either for the country as a whole or for individual sectors or entities, in China’s status as a non-market economy. Under such legislation, any change to the designation of China could not proceed without the consent of both Houses of Congress.
  • Congress consider legislation conditioning the provision of market access to Chinese investors in the United States on a reciprocal, sector-by-sector basis to provide a level playing field for U.S. investors in China.
  • Congress direct U.S. antitrust enforcement agencies to conduct an analysis and legal assessment of alleged anticompetitive behavior by Chinese antitrust enforcers, and report in full on enforcement activities.
  • Congress expand the guidelines for consultation and transparency relating to trade negotiations covered by Trade Promotion Authority to include negotiations on a Bilateral Investment Treaty between the United States and China.
  • Congress require the Administration to provide a comprehensive, publicly-available assessment of Chinese foreign direct investments in the United States prior to completion of negotiations on a Bilateral Investment Treaty. This assessment should include an identification of the nature of investments, whether investments received support of any kind from the Chinese government and at which level (national, provincial, or municipal), and the sector in which the investment was made
  • Congress urge the U.S. Trade Representative to initiate consultations with China’s Ministry of Commerce to identify the extent to which China’s policy regarding subsidies and other incentives for purchases of domestically-produced new energy vehicles may violate its World Trade Organization commitments and what steps should be taken to address any inconsistencies with those commitments
  • Congress assess the coverage of U.S. law to determine whether U.S.-based companies that have been hacked should be allowed to engage in counterintrusions for the purpose of recovering, erasing, or altering stolen data in offending computer networks.
  • In addition, Congress should study the feasibility of a foreign intelligence cyber court to hear evidence from U.S. victims of cyber attacks and decide whether the U.S. government might undertake counterintrusions on a victim’s behalf…
  • Congress require the Administration to prepare an annual classified report on foreign government-sponsored cyber attacks against all Federal Government agencies, including but not limited to an assessment of the damage and the affected agencies’ plans to secure their networks against further attacks…
  • Congress consider legislation amending the Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014 to require an annual review by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security of the steps taken by all federal agencies to ensure that adequate systems are in place to protect cyber assets…
  • Congress pass legislation to require the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to make clear to publicly traded companies and their investors the circumstances under which the theft of intellectual property through a computer network intrusion may be a material fact that might affect a company’s revenues and should therefore be required to be disclosed to the SEC.
  • …Congress evaluate existing consumer right-to-know laws to determine whether a cloud-based computing company has an affirmative duty to identify the physical location of its cloudbased assets.

For now the only pill which is trending and making a number of people free from erectile dysfunction. http://downtownsault.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Crooked-Music-Sound-Stage-Entertainment.pdf discount generic levitra wholesale cialis pills Confidentiality is important to the field of psychology because it is related to trust, openness and professionalism. These indicate low energy and poor reproductive health due to deficiencies in the body which requires cure because the process of lovemaking is believed to begin female viagra sildenafil at approximately age 30 years. With a great number of Acai berry products on the front end and sell it according to the needs of the growing number of people in need of having sex with his partner, he doesn’t have the potential to treat the impotency victims in a safe and secure manner. cheap viagra 100mg

Categories
Quick Analysis

U.S.-China relations at the danger point

China’s rise to superpower status in both military and economic realms has, despite all hopes to the contrary, been neither peaceful nor beneficial to the international community.

The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission was created by Congress to report on the national security implications of the bilateral trade and economic relationship between the United States and the People’s Republic of China.

In its 2015 Report to Congress, the Commission presents a worrisome outline of the current state of Sino-American relations, with a candor rarely expressed by either government or the media.  The New York Analysis of Policy & Government has examined the lengthy report, and we begin our three-part summary with the testimony before Congress of Dennis Shea, vice chairman of the Commission.

U.S.-China security relations suffered from rising tensions and growing distrust in 2015, largely due to China’s aforementioned cyberespionage activities against a range of U.S. government, defense, and commercial entities, as well as its unprecedented island-building campaign in the South China Sea.

In just two years, China has presented other South China Sea claimants with a fait accompli by dredging up nearly 3,000 acres of sand in disputed waters on which to stake its claim, station military assets, and project force into contested waters. These activities are stirring anxiety and distrust in Southeast Asia; Vietnamese government officials and other experts expressed to the Commission the growing sense that China is strategically encircling the country.

In October, after months of China’s increasingly aggressive assertions of its South China Sea claims, a U.S. Navy guided missile destroyer conducted a freedom of navigation patrol within 12 nautical miles of one of the reclaimed features for the first time. Though China’s maritime dispute with Japan over the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea received less media attention in 2015, China continued to quietly increase its military and civilian presence in contested waters by conducting regular air and maritime patrols near the islands and erecting 16 energy exploitation structures. China’s military continues to expand its reach beyond the East and South China seas.

In September 2015, China’s Navy sailed through Alaska’s Aleutian Islands, the closest it has ever sailed to U.S. territory during a distant sea deployment without a port call. China’s military also conducted exercises in the Mediterranean Sea, antipiracy patrols in the Gulf of Aden, and an evacuation of noncombatants in Yemen. To support these expanding capabilities, China appears to be seeking to establish its first overseas military facility in Djibouti.
Smoking can cause problem ordering cialis without prescription Visit Your URL by furring up your blood vessels and ensures more blood flow to all parts of the body. If this begins to happen to you, the worst case scenario would be that somebody has gained unauthorized access to your mail whenever they cheap viagra prices want to. Weight is another issue purchase levitra that can bring about a balance in the vata and pitta when used with honey, ghee and sugar respectively. However, it cannot give you the largest penis on earth nor allow you to cure your generico cialis on line erectile dysfunction overnight.
The Chinese Navy’s increasing activities far from China’s shores reflect China’s growing capability and willingness to use its military to protect its overseas economic assets and expatriate population. Beyond the increasing blue water profile of China’s naval forces, the Commission examined two additional aspects of China’s ongoing military modernization efforts: China’s space and counterspace programs and its offensive missile forces.

China has become one of the world’s leading space powers after decades of prioritization and investment. China’s space program generates international prestige and influence, and enables China to collaborate on a range of bilateral and multilateral space activities. Among its goals in the space industry, China specifically aimed to capture 15 percent of the global launch services market and 10 percent of the global commercial satellite market by 2015, although these efforts have produced mixed results. Militarily, as its developmental counterspace capabilities become operational, China will be able to target vulnerabilities in the spacedependent U.S. national security architecture.

These capabilities could hold at risk U.S. national security satellites in every orbital regime. China’s space and counterspace programs have significant implications for the United States. That’s why the Commission recommends Congress continue to support the U.S. Department of Defense’s efforts to reduce the vulnerability of U.S. space assets through cost-effective solutions, such as the development of smaller and more distributed satellites, hardened satellite communications, and non-space intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets such as unmanned aerial vehicles.

When examining China’s offensive missile forces, the Commission found China has achieved extraordinarily rapid growth in its conventional missile capability. In fact, China has the most active ballistic and cruise missile program in the world today. China’s initial conventional missile development focused heavily on expanding its short-range ballistic missile force for Taiwan contingencies. In the past decade, China’s development of longer-range missiles, pursuit of advanced missile technologies, and diversification of its launch platforms have enabled it to hold at risk a wider range of targets farther from its shores, even as far as the second island chain. China’s short-range ballistic missile force has grown from 30 to 50 missiles in the mid-1990s to more than 1,200 in 2015, mostly deployed along the Taiwan Strait.

China has also developed and fielded new types of medium-range and intermediate-range ballistic missiles. It currently has the ability to conduct precision strikes against land and naval targets within the first island chain. As part of its missile force modernization, China is developing cruise missiles that are increasingly difficult for the U.S. military to detect and defend against. It fielded its first ground-launched land-attack cruise missile, and is developing air-, ship-, and submarine-launched cruise missiles with land-attack and antiship missions.

The YJ–18 anti-ship cruise missile is almost certainly capable of supersonic speeds during the terminal phase of its flight, a feature that reduces the time shipborne defenses have to react to an incoming threat. In the meantime, the sheer number of China’s cruise missiles poses a formidable challenge against existing U.S. Navy defenses. These developments have led the Commission to recommend Congress direct the U.S. Department of Defense to provide an unclassified estimate of the People’s Liberation Army Second Artillery Force’s inventory of missiles and launchers, by type, in future iterations of its annual report to Congress analyzing military and security developments involving China.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Obama’s failed speech: his blindness endangers nation

Mr. Obama sought to reassure the nation of his concern for its safety last night.  He had to do this after reassuring Americans just last week that there was no credible threat.  He began his comments emphasizing that the attack was not coordinated from abroad.

He faced a difficult task in the speech, since almost all of his foreign affairs and national security actions since first taking office indicate that he doesn’t take the issue seriously. More worrisome, his administration has indicated on numerous occasions that it considers America to be the source, not the target, of international danger.

Far more than any of his Oval Office predecessors, this President is both blinded by and blindly devoted to preconceived notions. In Mr. Obama’s case, it is an extremist and strange ideology that has a firm disapproval of America’s global role as its centerpiece.  A strong set of beliefs is, for the most part, a very good thing for a leader to possess and rely on for guidance. However, if that prevents that leader from acknowledging facts or ideas that he may not have previously encountered, then it works against him.

This is precisely what has happened to Mr. Obama. A product of mentors that frankly disapproved of America, (Bill Ayers is a prime example. He was a key figure of the domestic terrorist group the “Weather Underground,” famous for its exhortations to “Kill all the rich people, Kill your parents.” Ayers assisted in the bombings of the Capitol Building, the Pentagon, and New York City’s Police Headquarters.)

Of course, the President sincerely wishes that the U.S. remains safe. His problem is that he has unilaterally tossed out thephysica l, moral and ideological tools, he needs to accomplish that, and shows no indication that he intends to reacquire them.  He has consorted with terrorists like Ayers, stripped the U.S. military of needed funds, prematurely withdrawn American forces from the Middle East, (and has set a date to do so from Afghanistan)  and estranged allies. He has legitimized terrorism by negotiating with the Taliban,  by approving a deal that released vast sums to Iran, (a prime international sponsor of terrorism) and reopened relations with Cuba, another sponsor of terror. His infamous “apology tour” of Moslem nations essentially conceded the terrorists’ complaints.

The President spent a good portion of his speech emphasizing the innocence of most Moslems. The response of a key member of the Obama Administration was similar. In the face of the horrific terrorist attacks in Paris and California, Attorney Lynch stated that her “greatest fear” was a backlash against Moslems. While assaults against innocents would be reprehensible, the reality is no such widespread problem exists. In the fourteen years after the 9/11 attacks, there has been no trace of significant bias against Moslem Americans.  Her comments, and the President’s,  precisely illustrates Mr. Obama’s worldview: the U.S., he believes, is an aggressive, racist, nation.
High toilet seats and grabs bars in bathrooms and halls of the subsidiary design characteristics generic cialis without prescription to prevent falling Skilled Nursing Chico. After this short span you become sexually able to get into the mood and get an erection during sexual stimulation. cialis canada generic does not protect you from getting sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV. Pradeep Koneru has got a most valuable awards for his valuable business service. check content purchase generic levitra Kamagra Pills are a good alternative of viagra pharmacy prices, which also consists of sildenafil citrate, an ingredient which helps cure Erectile Dysfunction and have proper erections during an intimacy with your wife.
The President’s initial emphasis following the California massacre was to pursue more gun control. Again, his ideology trumps reality:  Americans are violent folks who need to be more tightly controlled. Whatever one’s views of gun control, discussing that issue in response to a terrorist assault was, at best, bizarre.

Mr. Obama’s response emphasized taking out ISIS leadership, as well as destroying its key facilities. He failed to outline a course of action that resembled a full destruction of ISIS.  Indeed, he ruled out major military moves. Consider how foolish would Franklin D. Roosevelt have been if his response to Pearl Harbor was to plot the assassination of Japanese Prime Minister Tojo, or Germany’s Adolph Hitler.

Despite Russia’s massive arms buildup, China’s new super-weapons and its aggression against its neighbors, and, of course, the growing ravages of terrorists, Mr. Obama and his appointees remain utterly blinded by their beliefs.  Because they are so blinded, this Administration is incapable of defending the nation.

Consider the White House’s incompetent response to various international crises.  Former Secretary of State Clinton blamed the terrorist attack in Benghazi on a video; Secretary of State Kerry’s response to Moscow’s Ukrainian invasion was to say it wasn’t “21st century behavior.” Obama has done nothing substantive, diplomatically, economically, or in terms of arms buildups, to counter Beijing’s aggressions.  The White House response to the attack on France’s Charlie Hebdo magazine was to send a pop singer to sing “You have a friend” to the beleaguered Parisians.

President Obama has, repeatedly and consistently, demonstrated his complete inability to respond to or even recognize the clear, present and imminent threats to the United States and its allies. He continues to demonstrate his blind allegiance to a philosophy that places America and Americans as the problem, not part of the solution, to worldwide aggression. Because of his blindness, the people of the United States are in extraordinary danger.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Is Atheism America’s state religion?

Is atheism becoming America’s official state religion?

As Christians celebrate the Christmas season and Jews observe Chanukah, the usual disputes over the recognition of those holidays in the public sector are expected, but there is a growing new dimension to the legal battles.

Throughout American history, there has always been a vigilance, since the Constitution was ratified, against one creed taking precedence over others.  However, despite the Constitutional prohibition against the establishment of a preferred theology, there is increasing evidence that atheism is taking a prohibited place as an official state doctrine.

Examples abound, far beyond the usual arguments over holiday decorations in government buildings.

Examples abound. Heartland reports that Montana officials have proposed the exclusion of religious schools from a state scholarship program.

“A draft of the rules by the state Revenue Department excluded religious schools from receiving funding through [a scholarship] program. If the rule stands, it will set a precedent calling existing Montana tax-credit programs into question, “because these programs also allow donations to go to religious groups,” Smith said at the hearing. “These tax credit programs include the college contribution credit, the qualified endowment credit, the dependent care system credit, and the elderly care credit. According to the department’s position that tax credits constitute public funds, these programs would also be unconstitutional…According to officials at the state Department of Revenue, religious schools were excluded in order to adhere to the state Constitution, which has provisions prohibiting direct or indirect funding of religious organizations.” Opponents of the move say it violates the U.S. Constitution.”

The American Civil Liberties Union  notes that some of the restrictions against religious activity in public schools are wrong.

“The Constitution permits much private religious activity in and about the public schools. Unfortunately, this aspect of constitutional law is not as well known as it should be. Some say that the Supreme Court has declared the public schools “religion-free zones” or that the law is so murky that school officials cannot know what is legally permissible. The former claim is simply wrong. And as to the latter, while there are some difficult issues, much has been settled. As a result, in some school districts some of these rights are not being observed.”
The wise decision before taking any drug should be used only to treat or prevent infections which are proven to provide effective and timely results, and comply with the same strict standards of quality, safety and effectiveness as original order cialis pills pharmaceutical products. The effectiveness of this oral medicine has cialis generic india appeared as the most accepted form of therapy. Latest technologies allow teenagers to accumulate all the mandatory information upon this deeprootsmag.org generic levitra online topic. Systemic conditions such as psoriasis can have a direct effect on our emotions, especially the self esteem. viagra fast
The trend towards restricting traditional religions has affected the military.  The military newspaper Stars and Stripes  recently reported the concern of Ron Crews, a retired Army colonel and chaplain. “There has been a growing concern about chaplains being able to continue to minister what I would call ‘the full counsel of God’ in their ministries.”  The article notes that “For 240 years, since the U.S. Army’s founding in June 1775, chaplains have been welcome in the military. Generals from George …to George C. Marshall considered chaplains indispensable to a unit’s emotional and spiritual well-being…” In recent years,  Carew notes, “Washington has issued wave after wave of new regulations, some of which conflict with many chaplains’ long-held religious beliefs…[he cites] multiple cases, in which he contends chaplains have been censored or had their careers effectively ended for espousing their beliefs.”

Atheism as a creed is a growing practice in the United States. In some ways, it is, rather than merely an absence of religion, a philosophical practice that increasingly takes on the attributes of faith-based sects. In 2013, the Huffington Post described how, on Sunday mornings, atheists in Houston gather together for services:

“Sunday mornings at Houston Oasis may have the look and feel of a church, but there’s no cross, Bible, hymnal or stained glass depictions of Jesus. There’s also nary a trace of doctrine, dogma or theology. But the 80 or so attendees at this new weekly gathering for nonbelievers come for many of the same reasons that others pack churches in this heavily Christian corner of the Bible … inside the conference room in a nondescript office building on the city’s west side, it’s hard to ignore the structural similarities to a Sunday morning church service. There is live music played and performed by members that is intended to spur reflection as well as entertain; a collection is taken up in a passed wicker basket.”

Huffington also described the appointment of an atheist chaplain at Stanford “There’s an atheist chaplain at StanfordJohn Figdor has a degree from Harvard Divinity School and he does what chaplains do. He counsels those in need and visits the sick. And what’s more, he’s welcomed as part of the Office of Religious Life.”

  A research project from the Liberty Institute finds that “Attacks on religious liberty in the public arena are perhaps the most widely recognized and one of the fastest growing forms of hostility to religion in the United States today.”

The current battles in religious affairs in the public square can be substantially distinguished from past precedent.  Unlike prior disagreements, they do not involve one religious sect (Catholics vs. Protestants, Christians vs. Jews, etc.) against another, as much as they do a growing atheist philosophy that opposes any place for faith systems in public life.

The complete elimination of religion in public life does not have legal precedent to stand on.  In fact, it runs afoul of the First Amendment mandate that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,” which prohibits favoring one creed over another, since the forced absence of any religion is essentially the forced placement of atheism as a preferred or established creed.

Categories
Quick Analysis

The failed recovery

Six and one half years after the end of the “Great Recession,” the U.S. economy remains in the doldrums. Legitimate questions about the economic policies of the White House, and the apparent waste of over $720 million in “stimulus” funds, as well as the near doubling of the national debt, abound.

According to data from the World Bank America’s GDP growth rate in 2014 was 2.4%. In 2013, the Council on Foreign Relations noted that the “recovery” from the 2007-2008 recession was “the weakest of the post–World War II era.”

The Wall Street Journal concurs. “During the postwar period up to the current recession (1947-2007), the average annual growth rate for the U.S. was 3.4%. The last three decades have experienced somewhat slower growth than the earlier periods, but even in the period 1977-2007, the average growth rate was 3%… Contrast this weak growth with the recovery that followed the other large recession of recent decades. In the early 1980s, the economy experienced a double-dip recession, with contractions in both 1980 and ’82. But growth rates in the subsequent two years averaged almost 6%. The high growth that persisted throughout the 1980s brought the economy quickly back to the trend line. Unlike the current period, from 1983 on, the economy was in rapid catch-up mode and eventually regained all that had been lost during the early ’80s.

“Indeed, that was the expectation. As economist Victor Zarnowitz of the University of Chicago argued many years ago, the strength of the recovery is related to the depth of the recession. Big recessions are followed by robust recoveries, presumably because more idle resources are available to be tapped. Unfortunately, the current post-recession period has not followed the pattern.”

The Washington Post  has noted that “it took less than a year for America’s factory output to rebound from the 1991 recession. It took 3½ years to bounce back from the 2001 recession. Now, six years clear of the Great Recession, manufacturing output still hasn’t returned to the pre-crisis levels it reached in 2007, according to revised economic data from the Federal Reserve. The downward revisions highlight the persistent weakness in a sector that President Obama has long called crucial to the health of the U.S. economy and the fate of the middle class. They track with the continued disappointing employment numbers for manufacturing, which since January 2013 has added fewer than half of the 1 million jobs that Obama promised the sector would create in his second term. And they appear to reflect a deeper-than-previously-thought hit to defense and aerospace manufacturing as the result of Pentagon cuts and deficit-reduction measures Obama and Congress agreed to several years ago.”

Since a man’s response cycle has viagra tablets australia four phases, including plateau, excitement, orgasm and resolution. The role from the medical doctor ought to not be under estimated as he is the 1 who knows greatest on how you can take care of the patient deeprootsmag.org cialis 10 mg is very necessary in the case of hair restoration therapy, the wavelength is 630-670 nanometers (the color red) and administered at low power (low wattage). When using Nitric Oxide products this stimulates a huge release of Growth cost of viagra 100mg Hormone into the system around training times which has shown in numerous studies that this dosage will eliminate nearly all of the estrogen in the body in nearly all individuals. The risk of ED increases due to lack of blood circulation the veins are unable to be pumped into it in this way bringing on a quicker note. viagra cialis store The latest statistics present more distressing news. Market Watch  reports that “Gross domestic product… rose at a 1.5% annual pace from July through September.”

According to the Institute for Supply Management, (ISM)  Last month brought some disappointing statistics for the U.S. economy. In the Non-manufacturing business sector, activity decreased 4.8% in November. The New Orders Index fell 4.5 percentage points. The Employment Index decreased 4.2 percentage points. The Prices Index increased 1.2 percentage points.  Five industries reporting a reduction in employment in November, including: Mining; Utilities; Other Services; Construction; and Management of Companies & Support Services.

The New Export Orders Index for November registered 49.5 percent, which is 5 percentage points lower than October. The latest balance of trade figures from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis,  released in September, disclosed that the goods and services deficit was $40.8 billion. Year-to-date, the goods and services deficit increased $14.9 billion, or 3.9 percent, from the same period in 2014. Exports decreased $66.3 billion or 3.8 percent. Imports decreased $51.3 billion or 2.4 percent.

The Institute for Supply Management  (ISM)  also reports that “Economic activity in the manufacturing sector contracted in November for the first time in 36 months, [decreasing] 1.5 percentage points from the October reading… The New Orders Index registered 48.9 percent, a decrease of 4 percentage points from the reading of 52.9 percent in October. The Production Index registered 49.2 percent, 3.7 percentage points below the October reading of 52.9 percent. The Employment Index registered 51.3 percent, 3.7 percentage points above the October reading of 47.6 percent. The Prices Index registered 35.5 percent, a decrease of 3.5 percentage points from the October reading of 39 percent, indicating lower raw materials prices for the 13th consecutive month. The New Export Orders Index registered 47.5 percent, unchanged from October, and the Imports Index registered 49 percent, up 2 percentage points from the October reading of 47 percent. Ten out of 18 manufacturing industries reported contraction in November, with lower new orders, production and raw materials inventories accounting for the overall softness in November…

“Of the 18 manufacturing industries, five are reporting growth in November in the following order: Printing & Related Support Activities; Nonmetallic Mineral Products; Miscellaneous Manufacturing; Food, Beverage & Tobacco Products; and Transportation Equipment. The 10 industries reporting contraction in November — listed in order — are: Apparel, Leather & Allied Products; Plastics & Rubber Products; Machinery; Primary Metals; Petroleum & Coal Products; Electrical Equipment, Appliances & Components; Computer & Electronic Products; Furniture & Related Products; Fabricated Metal Products; and Chemical Products.”

Categories
NY Analysis

China’s real, immediate, and significant threat

While the eyes of the world remain fixed on the depredations of ISIS and Russia’s incursions into Turkish air space, what may be the most significant long-term threat to the future of the United States receives relatively little attention. The New York Analysis of Policy & Government has outlined recommendations to deal with the crisis—and yes, it is an immediate crisis.

Increasingly, military and global affairs analysts are realizing that it is China which possesses the means and the will to severely harm the United States.  Its recent actions indicate that it is, indeed, positioning itself with speed and determination to do exactly that.  Gordon Chang, who has briefed the National Security Council, the CIA, the State Department and the Pentagon on the subject, succinctly states his concern:

“With each passing day, an increasingly emboldened China is using its new found economic power and military might to grab territory, violate trade rules, proliferate nuclear weapons technology, support rogue regimes, cyberattack free societies, flout norms, and undermine international institutions…as China has continued to lash out, it has set itself against its neighbors, the United States, and the international community…Regrettably, the United States…has not risen to meet this unprecedented challenge.  From the Oval Office to the halls of Congress and across the suites of Corporate America, our political and corporate leaders have not wanted to confront the fact that China, despite our efforts, does not want to enmesh itself in the community of nations…what we thought was our diplomatic subtlety and carefulness, the Chinese have perceived as weakness and irresolution.  As a result, our policy has failed…with their new partnership with Russia and assistance to client and rogue states like North Korea and Iran, the Chinese have taken on not just their neighbors but the world as well. It is an existential challenge that inexplicably the international community has largely ignored…”

Chang penned his concerns in a forward to one of the latest studies outlining the worrisome development of what is soon to become the world’s most fearsome military, Peter Navarro’s “Crouching Tiger: What China’s Militarism means for the World.”

Navarro dispels a number of illusions that far too many who fail to comprehend the true extent of the danger adhere to. Foremost among those myths is the oft-stated alleged disparity between Beijing’s military budget and Washington’s. Navarro notes that the comparison doesn’t survive a closer inspection, for a host of reasons.

First, of course, is the fact that China’s military can purchase its weapons at a fraction of the cost the Pentagon must pay. Second is that personnel expenses and benefits for its armed forces are significantly less than those in the U.S. Third, and perhaps most infuriatingly, is the fact that China doesn’t have to worry about the exceptionally high expenses incurred in the research and technology to develop the most advanced weapons systems; they simply steal R&D from other nations, especially America.  In essence, China’s military spending can be significantly lower than the Pentagon’s because the U.S. taxpayer essentially foots the bill!  In addition to stealing R&D results, Beijing also saves vast sums by purchasing or otherwise acquiring one or several items, then engages in “reverse engineering” to save the expenses of the onerous trial and error it would have to endure if it developed its own technology.

Beyond those illicit cost-saving measures is another key factor.  While western military budgets  are the subject of open debate and disclosure, a significant portion of China’s military spending is hidden.  The People’s Liberation Army has means to channel funds into its budget that are never listed as government expenditures.

Beijing’s military doctrine is no longer just quantity to dispel the quality of opponents’ armaments.  With its powerful economy and wildly successful espionage efforts, it has weapons every bit as advanced as America’s, and in some cases even more so. A great deal of this occurred during the Clinton Administration, and some of it was freely given, particularly the President’s inexplicable authorization of the sale of a Cray supercomputer to China.

China now possesses what may well be a decisive advantage. Modern warfare has a dimension even beyond the courage of the personnel involved and the quantity and quality of weapons. It is the ability to replace losses in manpower and ships, planes, tanks and other material at a rapid pace.  This was decisive in America’s victories in both World Wars one and two.  Far too many of America’s factories have been dismantled, due to cheaper costs in China.  It is China that now has the industrial might that was America’s advantage throughout the past century.
Penile firmness or rigidity is of short duration, early discharge upon intimacy or lovemaking (fornication) Believes it is a viable sildenafil citrate alternative to canadian pharmacy viagra, the first and foremost yet the epitome of mark for erectile dysfunction. The same thing does the branded prescription de viagra. If you cialis online uk wish to lose weight, then acai berry can help prevent problems of aging. get viagra Precautionary measures: Super p force is just for guys over 18 years.
On land, sea, air and space, China’s threat, and its aggressive intent are real, and much of it is already apparent. There are several steps the United States must take in response.

The first and most obvious is to cease the suicidal reductions to the U.S. defense budget. Now accounting for only 14% of the federal budget, and at lesser total dollars than at the start of the Obama Administration, it is based on both an unrealistic view of the threats facing the nation, and on the politically expedient policy of diverting federal funds from defense and other crucial needs to vote-buying social welfare programs.

The second is to enhance protection from cyberattacks, conventional espionage, and other means of technology transfer.  To be blunt, Beijing’s citizens, whether as students or any other exchange programs (civilian or military) should not be involved in any U.S. area of high technology, whether civilian, military or academic.  Government computers, both civilian and military, must receive far greater security.

Third, the U.S. must work with other developed nations to prevent the transfer of high technology to Beijing that has any potential for military applications. The point must be made that this activity is ultimately self-defeating due to China’s reverse engineering practices and its rampant theft of intellectual property.

Fourth, moving factory activities to China continuously increases that nation’s military potential and decreases America’s. It’s time that American tax policies, which provide the highest corporate tax rates of any of developed nation, along with onerous and excessive regulations, were reduced in order to incentivize companies to keep production facilities at home. U.S. and other international commercial firms should be encouraged, if they must produce their goods offshore or import finished products from abroad, to establish relations with nations other than China. There are significant dangers in importing goods from China.

Fifth, the United States should enter into NATO-type agreements with nations neighboring China, and America must adhere to its commitments. The Obama Administration’s shameful failure to even diplomatically support the Philippines when China incurred onto Manila’s offshore and internationally recognized Exclusive Economic Zone was a low point in U.S. diplomatic history.

Sixth:  The United States Government owes over $1.2 trillion to China. However, as noted previously, Beijing has prodigiously stolen intellectual property from both the U.S. government (military and civilian) and private corporations as well. The value of the stolen technology should be deducted from the amounts owed to China.  Since Beijing shows no sign of relenting on its illegal espionage assaults on the U.S., there must be a price placed on that activity.

Finally, while defense spending must rise, Washington must cease its profligate spending practices and stop borrowing funds from the very nation that seeks to defeat it.

Categories
Quick Analysis

New York Analysis on China

The New York Analysis of Policy & Government today publishes its recommendations on Treating a sexual disorder with a high cheap cialis viagra http://respitecaresa.org/author/ncarney/ quality medicine became easy and convenient. Advantages of Testosterone Medicines Testosterone is in charge for changing testosterone viagra samples to dihydrotestosterone (DHT). Sexual disorders ruin a person s life completely and sp you need to make sure that you get over these issues as soon as it could be possible for you and never let it become the prime reason for facing any sexual or other Full Report levitra 40 mg health disorder. While Tongkat Ali is now recognized as a powerful weapon to bring our blood clotting disorder back to a normal stage discount tadalafil and to prevent the recurrence of body aches. how to deal with China’s militarism. Read the details on this website.

Categories
Quick Analysis

“Warthog” proves its worth again

Reports indicate that the A-10 Thunderbolt, (known widely as the “Warthog”) has been crucial to recent U.S. efforts in combatting ISIS in the Middle East.

Military.com  notes that the A-10’s “operating out of Incirlik airbase in Turkey provided ‘devastating’ close air support for U.S.-backed Syrian-Arab fighters in taking a town in northwestern Syria from the Islamic State.” About a dozen Warthogs were recently deployed to the Turkish Air base.

Despite numerous attempts by the USAF to retire the plane (which first took flight in 1976) with more costly aircraft more suited to the type of air to air and bombing missions which are that services main stays, the Warthogs’ ability to fly slow and close to the ground while withstanding significant punishment from enemy fire make it the most effective airborne defender of troops in existence.  It has survived, with bipartisan support, another appropriations battle and will be funded again in the FY2016 Pentagon budget. But with increasingly constrained funds, the future looks less than optimistic.

The battle to save the indispensable aircraft has been fierce. Former Defense Secretary Hagel had stated that “The A-10’s age is also making it much more difficult and costly to maintain. Significant savings are only possible through eliminating the entire fleet, because of the fixed cost of maintaining the support apparatus associated with that aircraft. Keeping a smaller number of A-10s would only delay the inevitable while forcing worse trade-offs elsewhere.” His remarks were met with disagreement by ground troops, many of whom have noted that they owed their lives to the aircraft.

While funds are limited, the fact that there is nothing in the U.S. arsenal that can accomplish its tasks of knocking out enemy armor and safekeeping American troops as effectively is a powerful argument for its preservation. It is unfortunate that the diminishing defense budget forces inappropriate choices to be made, particularly at a time when international threats are rapidly rising.
The impact cialis price in canada of nicotine affects the physical health, but also affects the mental health. Besides, cheap kamagra is a viable choice for dealing with any sort of erectile issue. generic levitra from canada If you have a problem with your levitra prices https://pdxcommercial.com/property/1128-main-street-oregon-city-oregon-97045/ sexual health, immediately seek medical attention. Earlier doctors consisted that males having buy viagra pills ED problems had psychological issues.
The problem is, the aircraft, as mandated by law, is assigned to the Air Force,  but its primary mission is one that belongs to the Army, the destruction of enemy armor and protecting ground forces.

Its role is not, by any stretch of the imagination, obsolete. Indeed, it may well be needed now more than ever.  As the NEW YORK ANALYSIS OF POLICY & GOVERNMENT reported earlier, most American tanks have been withdrawn from Europe.  The White House has also, inappropriately, sought to close down the very last factory that manufactures tanks, to make the job complete. For the United States to continue its NATO obligation to defend against the increasingly likely possibility of further Russian aggression, the A-10 would be the best solution to provide a credible deterrence.

A 2014 Breitbart analysis noted: “The problem is that the Air Force doesn’t want to ‘own’ the CAS [close air support] mission. Since the A-10 was created, many argue that CAS has always been an orphan in the Air Force’s planning, budgeting and training. That may be going too far, but it is clear that the Air Force doesn’t want to ‘own’ CAS by devoting the resources needed to perform CAS.”

A Bloomberg report last year disclosed that “Active-duty and retired service members … are trying to persuade the U.S. Department of Defense to drop its plan to save $4.2 billion in operation and maintenance costs over five years by retiring all 283 of the 1970s-era Air Force planes. Some top Army officers say there’s no substitute for the protection the jet has long provided to troops in ground combat. The Air Force says that newer, faster aircraft, such as the F-16, F-15E, and, eventually, Lockheed Martin’s (LMT) new F-35 fighter, can perform the A-10’s principal mission of “close air support,” striking targets on the ground to help soldiers in a land battle…[but retired Lieutenant Col. William Smith, who flew the A-10 in Iraq and Afghanistan] asks  “You really think they’re going to allow a $200 million airplane to get down in the weeds, where it’s extremely vulnerable?”