US Navy – USA Gov Policy

China has long had tense relations with the West over its claims to Taiwan. However, the latest Pentagon report on Beijing’s massively growing military might–“Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China”– points to hostile designs that include the entire region, directly threatening American allies Japan and the Philippines, as well as international commerce through essential waters.

The structure of China’s vast military machine clearly indicates an increasingly offensive force, one that views the United States as the key obstacle to its designs for domination of the region. Beijing’s forces are not only large; they are also technologically at the cutting edge. The Obama Administration’s weak response to China’s aggressive actions against Japan and the Philippines, as well other neighboring nations, has exacerbated the growing crisis by essentially providing that nation’s leaders with evidence that they will pay no price for their misdeeds. The White House has essentially remained neutral in the disputes, not siding with our friends against a mutual enemy.

Recent studies have shown that the extent of liver enzymes will increase once taking Oral buying levitra in canada http://www.devensec.com/sustain/eidis-updates/IndustrialSymbiosisupdateApril_June2011.pdf Steroid. But they cheap viagra no rx remain a temporary solution in the sense of making the offender more prone to take advantage of a top drawer penis health cream. In addition, those cheap and chemical based products are sales cialis http://www.devensec.com/meetings/ROD_5_22_18_signed.pdf not good for health, because they raise a number of negative health issues. You can include bananas, eggs, spinach, fish, broccoli, oysters and watermelon in cialis in spain your daily diet. There have been some signs that the White House, repeatedly criticized for its lack of support for allies, has made at least some gestures in acknowledgement of the growing threat. Military contacts with Manila have been beefed up.

But the problem is far more than mere diplomacy. The diminishing strength of the American Navy, a key element in deterring China, continues to be the key element.

What will happen if the U.S. continues with “sequester level budgets” for the military?

According to Pentagon sources, it would result in continued force-level cuts across the military services. The Army would be reduced to 420,000 active duty soldiers along with 315,000 in the Guard and 185,000 in the Reserve. The Marine Corps would drop to 175,000 active duty personnel. The Air Force would have to eliminate its entire fleet of KC-10 tankers and shrink its inventory of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). The Navy would be forced to mothball 6 destroyers and retire an aircraft carrier and its associated air wing, reducing the carrier fleet to ten.

Modernization would also be significantly slowed. Compared to plans under the fiscal 2015 budget, the department would buy eight fewer ships in the years beyond fiscal 2016– including one fewer Virginia-class submarines and three fewer DDG-51 destroyers – and would delay delivery of the new carrier John F. Kennedy (CVN-79) by two years. The services would acquire 17 fewer Joint Strike Fighters, five fewer KC-46 tankers, and six fewer P-8A aircraft.

There would also be sharp cutbacks in many smaller weapons programs and in funding for military construction. In addition, the department would invest about $66 billion less in procurement and research funding compared with levels planned in the fiscal 2015 budget.

The report notes that sequester-level budgets would worsen already existing readiness shortfalls across the force and delay needed training to prepare the joint force for full-spectrum operations.
The matter of purchase cheap cialis is interested one that was expected. This tablet is consumed into your blood more or less 30 minutes to an hour after the admission of this robertrobb.com levitra generika tablet and keep going for 4 hours. You are advised to cheap levitra no prescription go for walking daily. It tadalafil 40mg india is available in blister packing of 10 tablets.
The Department of Defense notes that “Overall, sequester-level cuts would result in a military that is too small to fully meet the requirements of our strategy, thereby significantly increasing national security risks both in the short- and long-term.”

Unlike the days of World War II, when America was able to recover from the devastating Pearl Harbor attack thanks to a massive industrial base, our manufacturing capability is now too limited to gear up in the event of a war. Indeed, there is only one plant in the entire US that manufactures tanks, and the Obama Administration has been attempting to close it down.

All this is occurring as Russia has dramatically modernized and improved its conventional and nuclear forces, and China has become a superpower. Iran and North Korea have also developed exceptionally strong and vehemently anti-American militaries.

The continued refusal to acknowledge the perilous international climate, and the ongoing cuts to our armed forces, are clear, present, and immediate threats to our national safety and sovereignty.

Quick Analysis

Why the Electoral College is Vital

Proposals for radical alterations in the way Americans vote are dangerous concepts that would have dramatic consequences for the nation and its Constitution. Some, such as ranked choice voting, are an unblushing bid to prop up fringe, leftist candidates. Others. if adopted, would essentially disunite the nation and overturn its Constitution. As they consistently have after each election loss, Democrat spokespeople have flooded the airwaves with complaints about the Electoral College. Why, they ask, can’t we have a “popular vote,” and let it be done with. Since the Electoral College process is part of the original design of the U.S. Constitution, it would be necessary to pass a Constitutional amendment to change this system. The National Archives notes that over the past 200 years more than 700 proposals have been introduced in Congress to reform or eliminate the Electoral College. There have been more proposals for Constitutional amendments on changing the Electoral College than on any other subject. The answer is as simple as the name of the country: The United States of America. The incredibly successful nation created almost two and a half centuries ago was a union of separate states. Fresh off of dealing with a monarch, it was intentionally set up that way to both prevent the possibility of having an all-powerful dictator, and to prevent larger states from bullying smaller ones. Abolishing the electoral college would essentially disenfranchise smaller states from having any say in the presidency. Indeed, even less populated areas of large states would lose influence. A collection of large cities, (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, Philadelphia, San Antonio, San Diego, Dallas, Austin, Jacksonville, etc.) would decide the outcome in who gets the White House. Considering how badly many of those urban centers are run, that would not bode well for the future of the country! Beyond the practical policy implications, it would alienate the populations of those not living in California, Texas, New York, Florida, Pennsylvania, Illinois, who would, for the most part, be reduced to bystanders in the race for the only nationally-elected position. A Heritage study analyzed the concept of a “National Popular Vote” (NPV) this way: “The National Popular Vote (NPV) plan is the latest in a long line of schemes designed to replace the Electoral College. Imbued with the ideals of this nation’s Founders, the Electoral College has proved itself to be both effective in providing orderly elections for President and resilient in allowing a stable transfer of power of the leadership of the world’s greatest democracy. Therefore, while it would be a mistake to replace the Electoral College, replacing this system with the NPV would be a disaster. The NPV would devalue the minority interests that the Founders sought to protect, create electoral administrative problems, encourage voter fraud, and radicalize the U.S. political system. It also would likely violate the U.S. Constitution’s Compact Clause while directly contravening the Founders’ view of federalism and a representative republic. In an age of perceived political dysfunction, effective policies already in place—especially successful policies established by this nation’s Founders, such as the Electoral College—should be preserved.” Trent England, writing for the National Conference of State Legislatures outlined key reasons for the institution: “At the Constitutional Convention, the primary concern of delegates opposed to direct election was that big states would dominate presidential politics. By using a two-step election process, the Electoral College prevents one region, or a handful of major metropolitan areas, from controlling the White House. Support must be geographically distributed around the country in order to win enough states to capture an electoral vote majority. This was particularly important after the Civil War. The nation remained divided, and Democrats became dominant in the south. A combination of intense popularity with some voters and violent suppression of others allowed Democrats to receive the most popular votes in 1876 and 1888 even though they lost the Electoral College and thus those elections.” Eliminating the Electoral College would be a disaster for the United States/