Archives

1, 2, 3

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thank you for your contributions. Maraming salamat. Alvincura ( talk) 00:22, 14 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Hello, KingEdinburgh. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:United States Space Forces Special Operations Command, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 09:05, 5 July 2024 (UTC) reply

May I request your assistance in uploading a portrait of MG Thomas C. Friloux from the Louisiana National Guard website, for the List of current United States National Guard major generals article? Tried uploading in the past but the site always returns a 403 Forbidden error. SuperWIKI ( talk) 07:19, 11 July 2024 (UTC) reply

@ KingEdinburgh, EPMen, Garuda28, and SuperWIKI: The Senate's version of the NDAA 2025 includes a clause making the commander of Naval Sea Systems Command a statutory eight year term of office, and the holder of the office would be eligible to be appointed to the rank of admiral, for the final three years of their term. It also includes a clause to make the Vice Chief of Space Operations a statutory four-star general. The House's version does not include these clauses, but once again, theirs includes reestablishing the statutory three-star rank for all the chiefs of a service reserve, and the Surgeon General of the Navy. Neovu79 ( talk) 02:47, 24 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Why the sudden importance attached to NAVSEA - perhaps recent controversy over the 31-amphib ship baseline? SuperWIKI ( talk) 02:52, 24 July 2024 (UTC) reply

Maybe they finally felt bad of the Navy, lol. The Air Force has less active-duty uniformed personnel than the Navy, but they have more four-star officers. But all jokes aside, it has to do with the growing threats in the Pacific from Russia, China, and North Korea. The Navy has spent years downsizing, during the Obama administration, that there are far less combat ready ships available than ever before. The Zumwalt-class destroyers and the Littoral combat ships are a complete failure and waste of taxpayer money, that the Navy has been scrambling to acquire more Arleigh Burke-class destroyers to meet global demands, and to fix the construction issues of the new Constellation-class frigates that caused the first ship to be delayed to 2029. Neovu79 ( talk) 03:28, 24 July 2024 (UTC) reply

@ Neovu79@ SuperWIKI@ KingEdinburgh

In my opinion, it would make more sense to bring back the 4-star Office of Naval Material with Naval Sea Systems Command, Naval Air Systems Command, and Strategic Systems Program (and maybe Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command, Navy Installations Command Naval Supply Systems Command, and the Office of Naval Research reporting to it. That's how it used t,o be. It would be almost identical organizationally to Air Force Materiel Command and US Army Materiel Command. I wonder why it was disestablished in 1983. EPMen ( talk) 04:21, 24 July 2024 (UTC) reply

An "innovation" of SECNAV John Lehman - he wanted the individual naval technical commands to report directly to the CNO. He was a hard-charger in Navy structural reform; unrelated, but he was the SECNAV who finally fired ADM Rickover. SuperWIKI ( talk) 04:54, 24 July 2024 (UTC) reply