About Half-way Home...
Feb. 28th, 2004 12:02 am11 pages down, at least 15 to go. Oddly enough, it has been these first pages, on the Cold War, which have been the hardest to write. I was amazed at how much I really didn't know about FBM (fleet ballistic missile) development, despite all the years that I've spent reading about submarines. Still, I've gotten through the Cold War to the "official" end of the Cold War, 1991, when the Soviet Union dissolved into component parts. I've now moved into the post-Cold War era, in a section I've entitled, "Ambiguity -- Indecision and Ineffectiveness." This deals with military-diplomatic events from 1991 (including Desert Storm which was, unfortunately, only half a victory) to 9/11. The next section will deal with our "war on terror" -- action in Afghanistan and Iraq, and then with the "future" of the Navy, with possible remarks on nuclear deterrence and China or North Korea. For the first time, I'm actually thinking I might not have to worry about hitting the 25-page mark. I'm actually beginning to think I'm gonna have to tone things back!
I am now taking a break from the writing of said paper. I've been at this since about 3:30 this afternoon and, even as I'm writing, I'm beginning to suspect that I'm rambling off topic and that the past two pages that I've written about Vietnam, Nixon, and Carter are completely off-topic. Granted, I'm not panicing; I remember feeling that I had careened off-topic with my last epic paper (on Wilson, public opinion, and his foreign policy failures), and then got an "A" from one of the toughest professors on campus. That, and this is a draft. I have plenty of time to veer back on topic. ::grin::
::pops over to the CNO's website::
::scrolls through, then stops::
::blinks::
"...Capture Sea Enterprise improvements to build a 375-ship Navy"
Build a 375-ship Navy? Build? Despite being immersed in the historic importance the Navy played in the Cold War, I do realize that, without the Soviet Union -- or any other serious blue-water navy -- as a threat, the current importance of the Navy in national defense and national security is somewhat diminished; there is a need to shift from "old ideas" of power projection and sea control to supporting joint operations. But is anyone paying attention to the role that the Navy played in Afghanistan? In Iraq? Even with Afghanistan being a land-locked nation, initial operations in the southern regions were largely a maritime function. Hell, we needed the aircraft carriers and other platforms because, while many nations "sympathized" with the tragedy of 9/11, few of them were willing to put their assets where their mouths were. Just because our nation has moved away from the use of nuclear force as a deterrent does not mean that deterrents of other types -- i.e. conventional in nature -- are not needed! If anything, we are in need of the power projection assets of a strong Navy more now than 1991.
Grrrr.
375. ::mutter::
I miss the Reagan years.
(/soapbox)
Time to *really* take a break.
I am now taking a break from the writing of said paper. I've been at this since about 3:30 this afternoon and, even as I'm writing, I'm beginning to suspect that I'm rambling off topic and that the past two pages that I've written about Vietnam, Nixon, and Carter are completely off-topic. Granted, I'm not panicing; I remember feeling that I had careened off-topic with my last epic paper (on Wilson, public opinion, and his foreign policy failures), and then got an "A" from one of the toughest professors on campus. That, and this is a draft. I have plenty of time to veer back on topic. ::grin::
::pops over to the CNO's website::
::scrolls through, then stops::
::blinks::
"...Capture Sea Enterprise improvements to build a 375-ship Navy"
Build a 375-ship Navy? Build? Despite being immersed in the historic importance the Navy played in the Cold War, I do realize that, without the Soviet Union -- or any other serious blue-water navy -- as a threat, the current importance of the Navy in national defense and national security is somewhat diminished; there is a need to shift from "old ideas" of power projection and sea control to supporting joint operations. But is anyone paying attention to the role that the Navy played in Afghanistan? In Iraq? Even with Afghanistan being a land-locked nation, initial operations in the southern regions were largely a maritime function. Hell, we needed the aircraft carriers and other platforms because, while many nations "sympathized" with the tragedy of 9/11, few of them were willing to put their assets where their mouths were. Just because our nation has moved away from the use of nuclear force as a deterrent does not mean that deterrents of other types -- i.e. conventional in nature -- are not needed! If anything, we are in need of the power projection assets of a strong Navy more now than 1991.
Grrrr.
375. ::mutter::
I miss the Reagan years.
(/soapbox)
Time to *really* take a break.