US Needs Larger Fleet To Counter Russia, China – Navy Chief

Donate

US Needs Larger Fleet To Counter Russia, China - Navy Chief

Source: navy.com

The US needs a bigger fleet in order to counteer Russia, China in the era of maritime competition, Chief of Naval Operations Admiral John Richardson told reporters at a Singapore naval base used by the US.

“We are getting back into, after decades really, an era of maritime competition,” Richardson said. “Some of these global powers, China, Russia, they’ve been growing, China in particular. They’re maturing in every dimension of power (and) at some point you turn to the sea to expand and continue to prosper.”

He argued that US Navy must catch up its competitors massively investing in maritime prowess.

Some experts argue that the statement looks like just another excuse for the expected massive investments into the US military-industrial complex.

US President Donald Trump had announced a massive rearmament program for the US Navy. The US feel will be reportedly expanded to 350 warships from about 272 now.

Meanwhile, the US Navy has become more active in areas adjacent to Russia’s and China’s shores.

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • paolo duchateau

    I prefer thinking that admiral doesn’t want to loose his fleet for bastards knowing nothing about reality.

  • nkohr

    This time U.S. will loose the arms race and go to financial crash… :)

  • FlorianGeyer

    All this stupidity and exceptional fantasy will hopefully hasten the bankruptcy of the USA. The USA has plundered all the low hanging fruit in the world and the fruit that is left will cause WW3 if the US Elite attempt to steal that.

    It will be far better for the world if the US Empire drowns in a deluge of debt, just as the British Empire did after WW2.

  • Leo Jansen

    The U.S. would go bankrupt if they would throw away Billions of Dollars for new Ships which they doesn´t need!

  • Expo Marker

    The US military is beginning to look like Swiss cheese, popular, but has a lot of holes.

  • Jesus

    The US Navy is good against third rate countries that are defenseless and unable to interdict their carrier task forces. Even with the proposed 350 ships, the carrier task forces are limited to 500 ( range of their air grouping) miles from Russian or Chinese coasts. Aside from the old Tomahawk US Navy does not have any offensive versatile weapons, unlike China’s DF 21 and DF26 missiles and the Russian Kaliber and eventual hypersonic weapons.
    China’s continuing of its rearmament naval program could produce 500 warships in the next 10 years if they wanted to, engaging US in a naval arms race whereby they have the financial resources while US does not.

    A naval arms race coupled with the de dollarization effort carried by China and Russia could render the US dollar succeptible of ending up in heaps in the US causing severe case of inflation and possibly hyperinflation.

    • Thegr8rambino

      I hope I move out of USA by then lmao

      • Jesus

        Things have been going down steadily for the last 20 years. A significant deterioration in a short period of time.

        • Thegr8rambino

          Yes and mostly because of Zionism and greed

          • Jesus

            Zionism became more accentuated in the US since globalization, allowing a handful of zionists to become multi billionaires and use their wealth for perverse purposes, at the expense of the well being of the country.
            This is the case in Europe as well.

          • Thegr8rambino

            yes it makes me so mad i hope to see it gone in my lifetime

    • dutchnational

      A naval arms race would be a bad thing.

      There is one factor however that is not factored in in this picture.

      That is the fact that neither China nor Russia has allies with a substantial navy (unless you consider them together)

      On the other hand, the US has a large number of allies with substantial navies. I am referring to the UK, France, but the other Nato members often have quite large navies.

      Those countries are now starting to modernize their navies too. Ours is a rather small navy, but even the Netherlands is investing in new ships. In itself not a gamechager. All added up it is really substantial.

      Of course, this will make the US navy more dependant on its allies. But that is what they wanted, right?

      • Jesus

        I am not too sure how French and U.K. Navies could help US navy in the Pacific, (Holland, Denmark, Norway navies are mostly coastal and they have to contend with the Russian Northern fleet) the Japanese navy might be better suited for it, the reality of the matter is, China wants to protect its shipping lanes from Indian Ocean to South China Sea, from direct interdiction from US navy. The man made islands in Spratly provide the Chinese with forward points of interdiction in the South China Sea, which is a thorn for the US Navy.

        Construction of US navy capital ships is becoming increasingly expensive, with little qualitative combat value added, the strategic mindset of WW2 defines US present day strategy, without taking into account advances in missiles and accurate delivery systems.

        China is building its 3rd carrier, after all shipbuilding industry is an asset to any country, as I said earlier, if China wanted to build another 5-7 carriers and 100 heavy destroyers in the next 10-15 years, they have the money to do so, and they will do it more cost effective than US. US defense budget is bloated and only some fraction of the budget goes for new yearly procurements.

        Increasing the defense budget and the de dollarization attempt carried out by Russia and China, which would eventually redirect overseas dollars back to the US, creating an over surplus in the money supply that would cause high inflation rate, which in turn would increase the interest rate Treasury has to pay for its 20 trillion debt, whereby servicing the mushrooming debt would become a major issue.

        • dutchnational

          I mentioned the Nato countries’s navies. Like you said, the same applies to the navies of Taiwan, South Korea, Japan.

          India also counts for a lot, though they are concentrated in the Indian Ocean and I do not know if they would take sides in a genaral conflict.

          As for the economics, your theory might be correct. On the other hand, if the US were not able to buy chinese gadgets anymore, it would create severe problems for the Chinese too, even more were other Nato countries involved.

          • Jesus

            Most everyday comsumer goods in US are made in China, I know the Chinese love money over open conflict, however, economic sanctions coupled with military actions would have more effective results against US.

  • Thegr8rambino

    With the way recent US military projects have gone, I am confident this plan will also be full of failure and overspending. The US is the number one threat to world peace right now, along with Israel.

  • Mons

    Against Russia you can count on NATO’s alles fleets.

  • Freethinking Влади́мир

    We need a smaller navy because we’re too aggressive already, said no Admiral ever.