Why 2015 & 2018 are the best years to invade the United States

USS North Dakota

USS North Dakota

According to Medium.com, 2015 and 2018 are the best years to invade the United States because those are the years the U.S. Navy—the main protector of America’s sovereignty—will be weakest, according to the sailing branch’s latest fleet plan.

That’s the short explanation. Here’s the long version:

Today the Navy has 288 combat vessels—by far the biggest and most powerful naval force in the world. But with China and Russia both improving their own navies, Washington wants to grow the fleet to an average of 306 warships through the 2040s … by building more vessels and keeping existing ships longer.

But before the fleet grows, it’s actually going to shrink by four vessels in 2015. That’s because next year, older warships will decommission faster than new ships float out of the country’s shipyards.

With 284 vessels, the Navy will be as small as it’s going to get for a good long time, assuming today’s plan holds.

But overall ship numbers are arguably less important than the precise mix of ships. So a smart invader might want to wait until 2028 to launch an attack on American shores, because 14 years from now is when the Navy’s attack submarine fleet will probably decline to a modern low.

Swift, silent and heavily-armed, the Navy’s nuclear-powered attack subs are by far its, and America’s, most powerful weapons for high-tech warfare. A single nuclear submarine can sink several attacking ships far from shore and also pummel ground targets with cruise missiles before slipping away at great depth.

Today the Navy has 54 attack subs and four special guided-missile boats packing more than 150 cruise missiles each.

That’s 58 of the deadliest war vessels ever to set sail—and more active nuclear subs than the rest of the world combined.

But the Pentagon took a long break from building subs during the 1990s and 2000s. Where once the Navy had bought four new undersea attack boats every year, for a while it acquired an average of just one annually. Congress finally took note and gave the sailing branch money to boost the build rate to a steady two boats a year starting in 2012.

And that means there’s going to be a big—but temporary—dip in submarine strength when the Los Angeles-class boats the Navy bought in the 1980s and mid-’90s finally age out. It’ll take a few years for new Virginia-class vessels to replace them.

The low point comes in 2028, when the Navy will have just 41 attack subs, 17 fewer than today. Since it takes around three submarines to guarantee that at least one is at sea and combat-ready at any given time, that translates to roughly five fewer nuke boats poised to sink an invading fleet.

Of course, that’s assuming that the Navy actually builds the fleet it wants. But that force could prove unaffordable, according to Eric Labs of the Congressional Budget Office.

“In CBO’s estimation, the full annual cost of the 2015 shipbuilding plan would average $20.7 billion over the 2015-to-2044 period—32 percent more than the average annual funding the Navy has received in the past three decades,” Labs pointed out.

~StMA

Advertisements

4 responses to “Why 2015 & 2018 are the best years to invade the United States

  1. Disturbing to say the least. Our enemies are very much watching and lurking.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. A physical invasion of the continental US is simply not feasible for any country or realistic combination of countries. The reasons for this are basically logistical. The US has 300 million people and 300 million guns in private hands. Invasion would require landing some 40 divisions within a 2 week period just to establish and defend a beachhead of, say, 100 kilometers of frontage and then, within 2-3 months, land another 100-150 divisions into the beachhead to complete the conquest. (Remember that Russian and Chinese divisional formations re only about half the size of US divisions.)

    And then there is the question of supply. Just keeping 40 divisions supplied in a beachhead would require the combined merchant fleets of China ad Russia. We had trouble resupplying the ground forces in France in 1944 with the largest merchant marine in the world and the two largest navies in the world.

    Now it is possible that the PRC, in alliance with Russia, could conquer Taiwan, South Korea and Japan against a very much weakened US Navy. But they would suffer significant losses in both merchant shipping and warships in the process. With what is left over, they might be able to take Hawaii in 2-3 years after that. But they would be in the position of having to out build a fully mobilized US industrial complex in the process. And you have to throw in the hundreds of US ships and thousands of aircraft now in mothballs but capable of being refitted in 1-2 years.

    The real danger of a weakend US Navy is the treat by the PRC to Taiwan, the Philippines and Indonesia. These become targetable for the PRC if the US naval presence in the Pacific is drawn down too far.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Thank you StMA for this important post. This situation is terrible; the vultures are watching us!

    Like

  4. While any diminution of force capabilities must always be carefully assessed, to suggest that a decline in the number of attack submarines in active inventory invites invasion of the continental U.S. is clearly an unwarranted exaggeration. The deterrent forces available to defend national territory involves eminently survivable intercontinental ballistic missiles as well as supplementary strategic bomber forces. What is a more serious consideration is the recognition that with Russia and China enhancing their submarine (and general surface) capabilities our security in depth will diminish. We will probably see more and more potentially enemy vessels appearing off our shores — and will have to reconfigure close in defenses — expensive and demanding, but hardly the threat to our national integrity posed in Medium.com.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s