Marines short 6 Infantry Battalions and the Navy short 100 ships.

There was a tabloid at the store that said "US Army Recruiting Command suspends all recruitment!!". I couldn't help but laugh

 

Who said we are short ships? The "article" is referring to HIS desired amount of ships...

LOL!

Hence why the OP refused to cite the article me and @Chrizton had to look it up ourselves. Alt leftists believe opinion pieces and run with it LOL!

 

And again....the president alone can only do so much. You should know this.

 

It sounds to me like the military, like the rest of federal government, didn't spend its money very well. Nothing new there.

 

Incorrect. The tabloid the OP refused to cite (which anyone can google) is referring to ONE MAN's assessment for future war with China. Not about our current readiness.

Does everyone believe an original post without actually researching it?

 

They were short before Trump took office. About half the remaining units were declared non combat ready. Trump got those units back up to strength so that they are combat ready.

 

I served in the Army. I know how badly the military spends money.

 

I'm in it now. There is no shortage of units and ships. The article the OP is citing is a tabloid that ONE PERSON is assessing for a WW3 involving China. It has nothing to do with our actual readiness. We aren't "short" any units or ships. We are just fine.

 

“In 2016, the Navy determined that it would need a fleet of 355 battle force ships to execute its mission.”
The Navy has about 299 ships. So not the 100, but still very short

 

Did you read the whole thing? I think you just read the first paragraph and ignored 355 and 377.

That ideal number is taking into account

It's the exact same thing being a company commander and asking your battalion for an additional 20 troops and they say "no you can handle the mission with your current unit" and you do. So you don't receive more in the future...

It means the military is doing a great job!

Well done President Trump!

 

I suggest you all read the article in the Marine Times where they also give the readiness status of our military branches, and it is not good news.

 

Why are you blaming Trump for all of this? The military asked for the funds and he gave them to the military. His job isn't to allocate unit funds lol. No President has since WW2 and even before then it was just for allocation for very specific units primarily intelligence. That means you're blaming a few Generals that didn't adhere to a risk assessment conducted by a single man.

So funny watching Civilians try and blame someone when they have no idea how the military works

 

Still short ships. You can spin and move the posts all you like.

 

Short ships from what? Which unit is short of ships? You're using a made up number from one man. And you didn't read the document or what was quoted.

What you're saying is that 4 high ranking officers are responsible for this made up shortage. What does Trump have to do with your outrage? He did everything that was asked. He's not responsible for the allocation once their funds are granted. Nor was Obama...nor was bush....etc.

Are you even aware how the military operates? You cited a source that proved yourself wrong so I'm just wondering where your military operations/opsec expertise comes from lol!

 

Who is the loudmouth braggart constantly touting how he upgraded our military?????

 

Hahaha no amount of you denying things makes you right. The navy determined in needs 355. They aren’t at 355. Pretty simple stuff. But of course you’re in an emotional state so now you’re going to try to drag me down your silly rabbit hole.
And for the record I was unable to enlist. For some reason the military wants people with two legs. Odd isn’t it?

 

Exactly. Army is missing the entire point.

 

The shortages are being WIDELY reported not just by the Marines but also by the Navy and the Air Force times as well as other news sources.

 

Trump did. We had 14 units reopen from Obama's budget cuts, a completely new cyber command in the reserves, and he also brought more soldiers home for training while Obama created a surge in the middle east.

If that's not helping the military then I don't know what you want to happen.

Also, what does it matter anyway? Biden is going to cut budgets he already made that clear. It wouldn't be that big of a deal if he would pull our troops out of Iraq and Afg. Instead, he wants more Syrian involvement and to poke the Russian bear in eastern european operations. Per his foreign policy...

It's amazing the logic you guys have. Trump gives military more money. Biden wants to take some away, and add MORE operations.

Math was never the left's subject.

 

I read the Air Force Association Daily Report every day. No such thing is happening.

 

24 Total federal units had a Surplus that was allocated to other branches after a two day debate by the cabinet. So not only did Trump do everything he said he would do financially and with congress, but he helped us gain funds. The problem isn't the President (no matter who it would be). The problem here is the expectation of war with China.

 

Adding this to post 46:

Not to mention the VAST need for cyber units. War with China would be heavy on the cyber aspect.

 

Just key in MARINE CORPS SHORT 6 BATTALIONS ,NAVY SHORT 100 SHIPS and you'll find a lot of online news sources including the papers of most military branches.

 

Understand it? I'm not sure at this point he can spell it

 

The point the lefties are not getting is that if they are concerned about mission readiness now...then they should be VERY concerned with Biden. Otherwise they are just complaining for the sake of complaining about Trump...it makes no sense.