Can Congress Revive Shipbuilding and Maritime Strategy?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 окт 2024
- A sailor from a landlocked state and a soldier from a state with the country's second longest coastline are trying to accomplish something transformative for American seapower. Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) and Rep. Mike Waltz (R-FL) are leading an important bi-partisan and bi-cameral effort to revitalize American shipbuilding and maritime strategy. They were kind enough join Ryan for a substantive and wide-ranging conversation.
You can read their report on national maritime strategy here (pdf).
Given the shortage of skilled labor in the shipbuilding industry, perhaps Congress should fund a vocational shipbuilding school that is FREE for Navy, Coast Guard and Marine personnel -- or maybe all US military personnel -- who are nearing the end of their service term. Shipbuilders are well paid. A cursory Google search suggests they make something like $65K to $150K (depending on seniority, position level, skill type, location, and performance). With that pay it shouldn't be hard to attract students from the pool of outgoing military personnel who would otherwise be entering the civilian world with no prospect for a lucrative job. Moreover, a free shipbuilding school would likely pay for itself by way of lower costs to get ships built and repaired.
It's just a rumor, that was spread around town
Somebody said that someone got filled in
For saying that people get killed
In the results of their shipbuilding
Thank you gentlemen.
I'm very close to this issue.
Where we once built ships, Sparrow's Point, Los Angeles, we now import Chinese goods.
Thank you Ryan for your labour. I imagine that your labour is not even close to even defying your time & costs. Thanks again!!
I HATE THE JONES ACT
I HATE THE JONES ACT
I HATE THE JONES ACT
A video on the strategic sea lift would be great because they are cargo ships thats just as fast as an aircraft carrier.
Well, you're wrong
By not building ships, we created a crisis.
The FSS ships have a maximum service speed of 34 kt.
@@amariner5 if you want to build ships just build them with govement money if needed.
@@paulmaartin sadly, that's what will happen.
Ships made to turn a profit are, or at least can be, better ships.
The dissolving of US ship building was a "great leap forward" in terms of losing brainpower.
@@paulmaartin we need ships.
We *could* spend taxpayer money, or we can tweak a law or two, and then a corporation can make money with ships, and we have them for our common defense.
This sounds like too little, too late. My sense of US Asian strategy is that it's entirely incoherent, based on unrealistic scenarios that are 20 years out of date. Not only is it impossible for the US to defend Taiwan (short nukes), it seems unlikely that it can ensure S Korea and Japan will have access to seaborne trade in the event of a major conventional war with China. Those two need at least 50,000 tons of food a day to ward off starvation. The US is determined to choose an indefensible point, a guaranteed defeat as its first battle against China. And, thanks to US intransigence in Europe, China's back is covered. Plus, that new ally will also supply China with massive raw materials in the event of a sea blockade. Unlike America's East Asian allies China is at no risk of starvation. Those allies really ought to reconsider their geopolitical stance. Being tied to a declining nation that's now fully captured by a mad political religion, Biocommunism, is unlikely to play out to your national advantage if you're within China's ancient sphere of influence.
Says so much of a countries values when it has to rely on military production as its engine of manufacturing growth.
Does it? So Sweden for example has questionable values because ship manufacturing is almost solely reliant on military production?
So no, it says nothing.
All space is marine by definition. Think about it!?
All your South East Asia base are belong to US