We’ve pointed out that under the current administration, Navy leadership has redefined what constitutes a “battle force ship” to include patrol craft (PC’s), hospital ships, and various other non-combatant support vessels. This is a blatant attempt to make the Navy’s force levels look better without actually adding any ships. Apparently Congress has taken note of this and is moving to limit or reverse the practice. From the H.R. 4435—FY15 National Defense
Authorization Bill, Subcommittee On Seapower And Projection Forces Markup comes this gem:
“Section 231(f) of title 10, United States
‘‘The term ‘combatant and support vessel’ means any commissioned ship built or armed for naval combat or any naval ship designed to provide support to combatant ships and other naval operations. Such term does not include patrol coastal ships, non-commissioned combatant craft specifically designed for combat roles, or ships that are designated for potential mobilization.’’.
That’s a slap on the wrist for the Navy. Well done Congress!
Well, if all we are trying to do is re-define what a combatant is so inflate fleet strength numbers to look like taxpayers are getting good deal for the budget expended on the Navy, we can easily have a 1200 ship Navy...
ReplyDeleteTry "A Combatant Vessel is ANY surface ship or boat which is capable of inflicting damage to another vessel, land target or enemy personnel by means of guided or unguided projectiles. The means of launching such projectiles must be mounted on the ship and/OR operated by her crew.
That ANY and OR basically allows one to claim that an inflatable life raft with one sailor holding a .45 pistol is a surface combatant.
Obama: Ronald you squeezed every penny and taken every hull out of port just to make a 600-ship Navy? Well I got 10000-ship Navy Now.
DeleteAnd they are every where too.
And that's the idea of " Military" for the Dem.