But Mr. President, you must be-leeve
by Tom Sullivan
While we're believing that Donald Trump is going to deport millions of undocumented immigrants without a plan to pay for it, and while we're believing he'll build a 2,000 mile-long southern border fence and get Mexico to pay for it (because Donald knows how to negotiate), why not engage in a military buildup without a plan to pay for it? (And without raising taxes. That's a given.)
According to Politico, "a growing roster of Republican hopefuls" believe the U.S. needs dozens of new warships if it expects to keep throwing around its global weight. Not that the news outlet could find any to quote for the article. Honestly, this almost reads as if it should be labeled "sponsored content" from the Navy League of the United States for the group's lobbying campaign, “America’s Strength: Investing in the Navy-Marine Corps Team”:
It’s a love affair steeped in the ideology that more warships bristling with aircraft and missiles translates into more security — and that control of the high seas will not only guarantee international trade but also check the worst ambitions of other powers like Russia and China. And it’s also fueled by a powerful shipbuilding lobby in Washington that is also calling anew for billions more in federal spending to beef up the sea service.
Christie was the first to raise the issue earlier this election season, saying the Navy “should be an armada without equal,” and pledging, if elected president, to reach the goal of 350 ships. Walker also noted earlier this year that “we’re at, what, 275, 280 vessels right now? We’re headed down toward 250. That’s less than half of where we were under Reagan.”
And on Monday, Kasich weighed in, saying that “reinvigorating the Navy’s ability to project power globally is critical to defending and advancing American interests, including ensuring the free flow of global commerce.” Rubio has been more nuanced, calling for increasing the number of aircraft carrier strike groups from 10 to 12 (the newest carrier, about to enter the fleet, is estimated to cost $13 billion).
Richard Danzig, former Navy secretary in the Clinton administration, believes this is "more sloganeering than strategic thought.” Candidates are substituting a nice, round number for sound planning. But then, it's what they do, and it's what the Navy League of the United States very much wants.
This rebuild-the-fleet tough talk is familiar to anyone paying attention when The Great Communicator ran for president in 1980. Reagan promised a military buildup, that trickle down economics would, and that his tax cuts would help America grow its way out of the budget hole they created. Really. Instead, the national debt nearly tripled. Can you hear Donald Trump promising the same?
Sometime during the Reagan presidency when economic reality was sinking in, at least for the country, Doonesbury ran a strip (I wish I could find) simply showing the White House exterior and Reagan talking to the fairy Tinkerbell. Reagan had worries. Tinkerbell had promised he could cut taxes, build a 600-ship navy, and balance the budget all at the same time.
"Oh, Mr. President, but you must believe," said Tinkerbell. Our current crop of Republican carnival barkers want Americans with swelling hearts and short memories to believe again, with Donald Trump in the role of P.T. Barnum.
Update: A clever reader supplied a link to the Doonesbury strip mentioned above. Thanks!