• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

The Official Thread Dedicated to "Trump Winning"

Top Five Steps Trump Has Taken To Prepare The U.S. Military For Whatever Comes Next​

Loren Thompson
Loren Thompson
Senior Contributor
Aerospace & Defense
I write about national security, especially its business dimensions.

Last week’s domestic reaction to the killing of Iran’s top military commander was predictably partisan and speculative. Nobody can say for sure what will happen next in the Persian Gulf—just as we don’t know what lies ahead on the Korean Peninsula, in Eastern Europe, or in the Horn of Africa.
In such circumstances, the only prudent posture for America’s military is to be prepared for a diverse array of challenges. That is the vector President Trump put military plans on when he took office. Whatever you may think of Trump the man, he installed a highly capable defense team that systematically addressed military deficiencies inherited from the Obama years.

The Obama Administration badly misread global security trends, failing to anticipate Russia’s military resurgence, the rise of ISIS, and various other challenges. As a result, Washington took a number of steps such as the drawdown of forces in Europe and Iraq that later looked misguided. It fell to Trump to reverse course and revitalize the nation’s defense posture.
He did this first and foremost by increasing defense outlays 25% between 2016 and 2020—an increase in funding greater in size than the entire military budget of any nation other than China. But the president didn’t just throw money at the problem. From its first months in office, the administration always had a plan for recovering ground lost during the Obama years.
Tank, fire

An Abrams tank on night maneuvers in November. President Trump's military modernization program ... [+]
DEFENSE VISUAL INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SERVICE
Here, in my judgment, are the five most important things the Trump defense team has done.
Increased funding for readiness. On the eve of Trump’s election, the Government Accountability Office reported “persistently low readiness levels” in the joint force, which it attributed to high operating tempo, end-strength reductions, under-funding of training activities, and the departure of seasoned weapons maintainers. Military aircraft accidents increased 40% between 2013 and 2017, signaling a deterioration in pilot skills. Military leaders warned only a fraction of the force was ready to fight effectively on short notice.

Against that backdrop, the Trump Pentagon launched a multiphase process to rebuild the military. In 2017, it would increase spending on readiness. In 2018 it would sustain funding for readiness—training, maintenance, etc.—while filling “holes” in the military posture such as inadequate stocks of precision munitions. In 2019 it would begin making down payments on increased lethality to cope with the challenges posed by Russia and China, and in 2020 it would go full-bore on buying a new generation of weapons. Trump’s team saw it would take years to return to a high state of readiness, and so that’s where its plan began.
Investment in core warfighting systems. When President Trump took office, the U.S. military was suffering from decades of under-investment in new technology. The Air Force’s fleet of bombers, fighters and tankers was the oldest it had ever been. The Army’s helicopters and armored vehicles consisted largely of programs begun during the Reagan years (or earlier). Some warfighting systems had grown so decrepit that the military services were proposing their retirement despite a lack of newer weapons with which to replace them.
The Trump team greatly increased funding for development and procurement of new weapons. Outlays for R&D increased over 50% between 2016 and 2020, while outlays for the procurement of weapons rose 35%. Much of this money was devoted to fielding a new generation of warfighting systems, including a more survivable bomber, longer-range rotorcraft and unmanned systems. But funding was also provided to accelerate upgrades to signature warfighting systems such as the Army’s Abrams tank and the Navy’s Virginia-class attack submarines.
Modernization of nuclear forces. Recapitalization of the nation’s aging nuclear arsenal was the first major military initiative Trump cited when he announced he intended to seek the presidency. Deterring nuclear attacks by sustaining a diverse and survivable retaliatory force has long been the foundation of the U.S. defense posture, but by the time Trump decided to run the entire strategic arsenal had grown old, including its command and control network and its industrial complex. Yet the Obama Administration had repeatedly delayed or deferred investment in new nuclear capabilities.
Following release of a nuclear posture review, the Trump Administration affirmed plans to modernize all three legs of the strategic arsenal—sea-based missiles, land-based missiles and bombers—while making major upgrades to the command network and revitalizing industrial facilities. Unlike President Obama, President Trump has never expressed ambivalence about the need for nuclear weapons, including tactical nuclear weapons that can be carried on F-35 fighters and other weapons to match the shorter-range devices Russia deploys in Europe.
Bolstering resilience in space. In the years since the Cold War ended, U.S. military forces have become heavily dependent on satellites for missile warning, secure communications, intelligence and navigation. For instance, a typical Army brigade contains many hundreds of systems dependent on signals from the Global Positioning System to function effectively. The same is true of smart bombs used by the Air Force and Navy. Seeing how important orbital systems have become to the joint force, Russia and China are developing diverse means for destroying or degrading key space systems in wartime.
The Trump Administration has launched a major effort to increase the resilience of U.S. space assets, which includes making orbital capabilities more survivable, protecting ground systems, and rendering downlinks/uplinks harder to jam or intercept. Much of the new money is going to secret projects such as sophisticated sensor arrays, but the organizational manifestations of increased emphasis on space are easy to see: a sixth branch of the military called the Space Force, a unified command, a dedicated Space Development Agency, and other bureaucratic constructs. President Trump has done more to elevate the priority of national security space activities than any other chief executive.
Pressing allies to do their part. President Trump has not been shy about telling allies they must do more to support collective security. That goes particularly for the European members of NATO, many of whom have stopped thinking rigorously about the military threat posed by Russia. For instance, Germany—one of the world’s biggest economies—spends less in a year on defense than Washington does in a month. The ability of NATO forces to deter or defeat Russian aggression is undermined by this lack of commitment.
Trump has correctly stated that the U.S. gets less from its alliances than overseas partners do even though it pays much more to keep those alliances viable. Some have said this makes him a neo-isolationist. However, the extensive funds provided by the administration for efforts such as the European Deterrence Initiative demonstrate that Trump’s main goal isn’t to withdraw from overseas, but to fashion a collective security posture that assures victory if war occurs.
The above five efforts are just the beginning of what the Trump defense team has done to bolster America’s military since taking office. From hypersonic weapons to multi-domain warfare to soldier lethality, Trump has done more to rebuild U.S. warfighting capabilities than any president since Reagan. It is hard to imagine any of the Democrats currently seeking their party’s presidential nomination pursuing a military agenda that is similarly ambitious.
That is not rebuilding the military. Nobody said he didn't do anything to HELP the military. He just didn't rebuild it. It's a lie.
 
And while I'm thinking about it, no, I don't want to silence millions of voters, but I certainly don't want Trump to run again. I think it is a sure loser. There are politicians (Ron Desantis comes to mind) that can articulately lay out the conservative plan for America and how it benefits them, rather than hold rallies to tell everyone how great you are. Trump did some great things, but the problem is Trump loves Trump above all else, and I'm not a fan of that. I'll never vote for a democrat for the rest of my lifetime, but if Trump is the nominee in 2024, I'll probably write in my vote or not vote at all.

Well that's just brilliant. We had 4 years (well, almost if you remove the WuFlu) of peace and prosperity, but because Trump loves him some Trump and said a lot of stupid ****, you're not going to vote for him and what's best for this country.

I'd personally prefer Ron DeSantis as well, but if it's Trump on the ticket vs. any of these other corrupt empty suits, I'm running to the voting booth. To each their own, but because you don't like Trump, you're not going to vote for him? So if the President/CEO of the company you work for is a dick and has a personality you don't like but makes that company run well, which in turn maximizes the prosperity and peace of mind for you and your family, you still don't want him President is essentially what you're saying. Brilliant.

And like his personality has any actual bearing on your day-to-day life.
 
Huh, about the fairest, most accurate election ever in 2020 ...
May 20, 2021

An election audit in New Hampshire may be the pebble that diverts the stream​

By Andrea Widburg

I've shied away from reporting on events in Maricopa because it would require more hours than I have in a day to track intelligently the back-and-forth in that recount. My touchstone there is the fact that the Democrats' and NeverTrumps' ferocious efforts to stop the count strike me as the actions of people with something to hide. Otherwise, they'd be there helping to prove they're right. Events in a small town in New Hampshire, though, are more interesting, because a low-key audit may reveal serious election anomalies harming Republicans.

Windham, New Hampshire, a town of 14,853 people, has long been a stalwart Republican stronghold in an otherwise Democrat state. As was the case throughout New Hampshire, it relied on AccuVote machines to collect and tally its 2020 votes.
When the election in Windham ended, Kristi St. Laurent, the Democrat candidate, had lost by only 24 votes. With that close a margin, she naturally demanded a hand recount.
The hand recount revealed something peculiar: St. Laurent hadn't lost by 24 votes; she'd lost by 420 votes. In a small election, that meant that her margin of defeat wasn't 0.005% but was, instead, 9.6%, which is a significant loss.

That same recount revealed an even greater anomaly: across the board, in every Windham election, Republicans had been shortchanged, and Democrats had been overcounted:
229583_5_.png

7_201_9.gif

Those kinds of numbers manifestly demanded a full recount, which is what's happening now in Windham. And as with counts and recounts elsewhere, funny things are happening — not funny-ha-ha, but funny-peculiar:
An audit team sent to conduct a forensic examination of the 2020 election results in Windham, N.H. started the process off well enough on Tuesday. But by Wednesday, they hit a major snag: The live stream cameras that had been broadcasting the audit room around the clock went offline for close to 90 minutes, potentially obscuring any problematic intervention.

The team decided Thursday morning to reinspect the ballot machines on camera in an attempt to maintain observers' faith in their process. They needed to determine whether the machines had been tampered with over night when the cameras mysteriously went down.
Even if the camera failure is nothing, the consistent Republican deficits cannot be shrugged off as a series of random errors. When a "mistake" repeatedly runs in only one direction over a separate series of events, the hand of man becomes apparent.
New Hampshire was called for Biden, but if the "mistake" was state-wide — that is, if Republicans were undercounted and Democrats overcounted in every county — perhaps Biden didn't win New Hampshire. And if he didn't win New Hampshire, maybe he didn't win in some other states called for him, either.

Our elections need to be tightened — and doing away with voter ID is not the way to do it. Although I seldom look to England for anything good lately (sorry, England, I once loved you as only a true Anglophile could), its approach to voting is superb and getting better. Funnily enough, though, that's one policy that the left — which is always anxious to show how badly America measures up to the rest of the world — doesn't want to copy.


Republican candidates short-counted by 6% or more, (D)imbos overcounted or counted to within 0.008%? Cue Decaf and the (D)imbos:

giphy.gif
 
Huh, about the fairest, most accurate election ever in 2020 ...



Republican candidates short-counted by 6% or more, (D)imbos overcounted or counted to within 0.008%? Cue Decaf and the (D)imbos:

giphy.gif

That's a great article. Of course we will be told, it's tinfoil hat stuff, math isn't science, cameras going down during the audit isn't at all suspicious, and Joe really did get over 80 million votes.
 
That is not rebuilding the military. Nobody said he didn't do anything to HELP the military. He just didn't rebuild it. It's a lie.

The article Tim cited included the following:

Investment in core warfighting systems. When President Trump took office, the U.S. military was suffering from decades of under-investment in new technology. The Air Force’s fleet of bombers, fighters and tankers was the oldest it had ever been. The Army’s helicopters and armored vehicles consisted largely of programs begun during the Reagan years (or earlier). Some warfighting systems had grown so decrepit that the military services were proposing their retirement despite a lack of newer weapons with which to replace them.
The Trump team greatly increased funding for development and procurement of new weapons. Outlays for R&D increased over 50% between 2016 and 2020, while outlays for the procurement of weapons rose 35%. Much of this money was devoted to fielding a new generation of warfighting systems, including a more survivable bomber, longer-range rotorcraft and unmanned systems. But funding was also provided to accelerate upgrades to signature warfighting systems such as the Army’s Abrams tank and the Navy’s Virginia-class attack submarines.

rebuild​

re·build | \ (ˌ)rē-ˈbild \
rebuilt\ (ˌ)rē-ˈbilt \; rebuilding

Definition of rebuild

transitive verb
1a: to make extensive repairs to : RECONSTRUCT
rebuild a war-torn city
b: to restore to a previous state
rebuild inventories
2: to make extensive changes in : REMODEL
rebuild society
 
The article Tim cited included the following:



rebuild​

re·build | \ (ˌ)rē-ˈbild \
rebuilt\ (ˌ)rē-ˈbilt \; rebuilding

Definition of rebuild

transitive verb
1a: to make extensive repairs to : RECONSTRUCT
rebuild a war-torn city
b: to restore to a previous state
rebuild inventories
2: to make extensive changes in : REMODEL
rebuild society

I didn't post it. I know TSNN (Tim Steelersfan News Network) was. busy here the past couple days, but Indy posted that article about rebuilding the military
 
I didn't post it. I know TSNN (Tim Steelersfan News Network) was. busy here the past couple days, but Indy posted that article about rebuilding the military

Should've known. The article was intelligent, made sense, and showed the poster knew the difference between his ******* and a garbage can. That would immediately disqualify you on all counts.
 
the poster knew the difference between his ******* and a garbage can.

One is a receptacle that takes whatever disgusting filth known to man (and Ogre) inside of it.

The other is a garbage can.
 

Donald J. Trump​

6:17pm May 21, 2021
Many people have asked about the beautiful Boeing 757 that became so iconic during the Trump rallies. It was effectively kept in storage in Upstate New York in that I was not allowed to use it during my presidency. It is now being fully restored and updated and will be put back into service sometime prior to the end of the year. It will soon be brought to a Louisiana service facility for the completion of work, inspection and updating of Rolls-Royce engines, and a brand new paint job. When completed, it will be better than ever, and again used at upcoming rallies!

Tibs tosses Flog's salad.jpe
 
You don't say... shocking, I tell you, simply shocking.

 
Want to guess who the "victim" will be?

That's going to leave a mark! I hope that tree isn't too damaged from that guy's head bouncing off it. I hope someone can come by,drop a little fertilizer and water on it just in case. Did anyone start a GoFundMe page for the tree yet?....grin
 
That's going to leave a mark! I hope that tree isn't too damaged from that guy's head bouncing off it. I hope someone can come by,drop a little fertilizer and water on it just in case. Did anyone start a GoFundMe page for the tree yet?....grin
I'd like to shake the hand of the driver.
 
I don't trust anything coming out of the DOJ. It has become a politicized weapon to be used against one's political opponents. Same with the IRS. The Obama IRS head has to plead the 5th so she wouldn't incriminate herself speaks volumes about the corruption. But don't worry, the MSM will do their best to play up this charade.
 
I don't trust anything coming out of the DOJ. It has become a politicized weapon to be used against one's political opponents. Same with the IRS. The Obama IRS head has to plead the 5th so she wouldn't incriminate herself speaks volumes about the corruption. But don't worry, the MSM will do their best to play up this charade.

Yep. And it's simply shocking that the corrupt empty suits who made it their life's mission to destroy Trump at every turn are having another go at it.

Shocking I tell ya.
 
As this news takes over the headlines tonight, let’s not forget that it was Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's line of questioning of Michael Cohen that teed this whole case up.

Let's play it back, it's worth a watch. The kill shot is 0:55-1:30. Man, she nailed it. No wonder AOC has the entire right-wing ******** in their pants. She runs laps around the GOP, makes them look like the fools & suckers that they are.


 
Top