April 1, 2025 • 55 mins
America faces a maritime crisis that few citizens recognize but that threatens our national security at its core. In this eye-opening conversation, Captain Brent Ramsey, a 40-year Navy veteran and defense writer, provides urgent insights into America's diminishing naval capabilities against China's rapidly expanding fleet and strategic ambitions.
- America's status as a maritime nation with 90% of global commerce traveling by sea
- US Navy has shrunk from 600+ ships during the Reagan era to just 295 ships today China's naval force now numbers 400 combat vessels plus 180 armed Coast Guard ships
- America's shipbuilding capacity is 1/20th of China's current production capability
- Chinese technology theft costs the US approximately $600 billion annually
- US Navy recruitment shortfalls and inability to meet readiness goals
- China's stated intentions to seize Taiwan by 2027 and achieve global dominance by 2049
- Current naval funding represents just 0.5% of the federal budget
- Critical shortage of skilled tradespeople needed for shipbuilding
- Importance of revitalizing America's naval industrial base and defense capabilities
BIO: Captain Brent Ramsey (U.S. Navy, Ret.) served 30 years in the Navy and 23 years in Navy Civil Service. His assignments included Commanding Officer, Cargo Handling Battalion TWELVE, Executive Director, Construction Battalion Center, Gulfport, and Mississippi Navy Emergency Preparedness Liaison Officer. He served as Senior Advisor, Center for International Maritime Security, and was Member and Secretary of the non-partisan Military Advisory Group for Congressman Mark Meadows (NC-11) for four years. He currently serves in the same capacity for Congressman Chuck Edwards. He is a Vice President with Calvert Task Group (CalvertTaskGroup.org) and on the Board of Advisors for STARRS (STARRS.US) and the Center for Military Readiness. CAPT Ramsey studied at Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California, and is a graduate of the Naval Facilities Engineering Command Executive Management Program, the Reserve Components National Security Course, and the FEMA Emergency Preparedness Management Officers Course. He has written extensively on national defense matters since 2017.
_______________________________________
For more information about STARRS, go to our website: https://starrs.us which works to eliminate the divisive Marxist-based CRT/DEI/Woke agenda in the Department of Defense and to promote the return to a warfighter ethos of meritocracy, lethality, readiness, accountability, standards and excellence in the military.
Join our Mailing List for our weekly newsletter on this issue.
Follow STARRS:
X | Facebook | LinkedIn | Rumble | YouTube | Truth | Gettr | Gab
Support the Mission: Make a tax-deductible donation to STARRS.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Al Palmer (00:11):
Well, hello America.
This is your host, Commander AlPalmer of STARRS and Stripes.
It's good to have you back withus again.
I think we're going to have avery interesting show today.
Again, I think we're going tohave a very interesting show
today.
We're going to talk a little bitabout our United States Navy
its condition, the things thatit's got that are going so well
(00:31):
for it, as we always have butalso some of the challenges that
it faces going forward.
The Navy is an important partof our defense establishment.
Why?
Because the power of the seasestablishment.
Why?
Because the power of the seas,with two oceans on either side
of us, makes it one of thedriving forces in both commerce
as well as defense.
So having a strong navy todefend our external waterways is
(00:56):
important, and we're very goodat that.
We have been for many years.
But sometimes that gets offtrack when funding goes away or
when politics may change it, andwe're going to talk about that
today with one of my favoritepeople, captain Brent Ramsey.
Brent is a career naval officer, surface officer a little bit
(01:20):
of time in submarines, I think,along the way, but he's been a
defense writer for years.
He's written very extensivelyon the Navy, the problems and
the advantages that we do have,and it's great to have him with
us, both as a writer but also aspart of STARRS.
He's on our Board of Advisorsfor STARRS as well as on the
(01:41):
Board of Advisors for theCaliber Task Group, and he's
been very active in trying tokeep the Navy strong today.
And, brent, it's great to haveyou with us again.
Welcome back to STARRS andStripes.
Brent Ramsey (01:59):
Thanks so much Al Appreciate it.
Al Palmer (02:03):
So tell us a little bit about how you got involved
in the Navy.
We all ended up, probably withsome relation or some way of
wanting to get into the Navy.
What was your story?
How did you get into the Navy?
Brent Ramsey (02:16):
Well, I'm a Navy brat.
My dad went into the Navy in1942, right after Pearl Harbor
and saw a lot of combat in boththe Atlantic and Pacific during
the war.
And then, after the war wasover, he decided to make the
Navy his career.
So I grew up.
I was born in a Navy hospital.
I grew up in the Navy, movedall around the country following
(02:42):
my dad and he's a retiredMaster Chief.
He's buried.
He and my mom were both buriedin Arlington.
At any rate, there was noquestion what I was going to do
growing up, because my dad toldme I was going in the.
Navy and back in those days youdid what your old man said.
So I was commissioned throughthe NROTC program at the
(03:07):
University of Nebraska, lincoln,nebraska, in 1969.
And, like you said, I spent mylife, most of it, in the Navy,
both on active duty as areserves officer and also Navy
civil service, and I even workedfor the Navy for a while as a
contractor.
So altogether about 40 years ofexperience with the Navy in a
while as a contractor.
So altogether about 40 years ofexperience with the Navy in a
lot of different areas some seaduty, a lot of time ashore, a
(03:31):
lot of time with the SeabeesCombat Engineer Force for the
Navy.
And how I got into my study moredetailed study after I retired
of the Navy at some junctureback in 2015 about I found
(03:51):
myself on the military advisorygroup from Congressman Mark
Meadows.
At the time my wife and I livedin Western North Carolina in
Mark's district and he had beenelected to Congress and a friend
of mine, Shanghai, got me onhis military advisory group and
he said hey, brent, you and theothers on my advisory group
(04:14):
write articles about themilitary so that I can comment
on them, so I'll know whatissues are facing the military
and it will strengthen myability to do things helpful to
the national defense.
So I started writing in 2017and I've continued that, just
today published another articleon China in a venue called the
(04:39):
Patriot Post.
Al Palmer (04:43):
So as a service brat, you saw all of the workings of
the military from inside, whichobviously helped you get adapted
to the Navy, probably easierthan the average bear right.
Brent Ramsey (04:55):
Well, yeah, I was stationed all over the place,
shipboard, ashore, with the EODcommunity, with the Seabees,
with the P3 community.
I had extensive experience allover the world really and saw a
lot of different elements of theNavy and as a civilian I spent
(05:19):
the majority of my time as acivilian with the Seabees, but a
lot of it was also with theoceanographic community.
So really, my 40-year career Igot exposure to virtually every
part of the Navy.
I didn't really have anyexposure per se to the submarine
community other than one day asa midshipman, a familiarization
(05:41):
cruise on an old diesel boat.
But I was stationed on anaircraft carrier, I was on a tin
can, I was on a cruiser, anuclear-powered cruiser.
Like I said, a lot of shoreduty all around the world and,
like I said, I've made it mybusiness since I retired.
I like to tell my friends,retirement is a myth.
If you have an active mind andan interest in our country, you
(06:04):
never really retire.
So I've been involved in, youknow, veterans issues since I
retired, belong to MOA, NavalInstitute, Association of the
United States Navy, Navy Leagueof the United States Navy League
of the United States and havedone what I can to stay current
(06:25):
on what the Navy is doing.
You know, strategically youmentioned in your intro we're a
maritime nation From ourfounding.
Even before our founding,everybody knew it was important
for us to have a strong navy.
We're surrounded by water onthree sides.
(06:46):
We have more water coastlinepractically than any other
nation on earth.
90% of the commerce in theworld goes by sea.
Just about 70% of the commercethat US itself depends on
transportation by sea.
Itself depends ontransportation by sea.
(07:09):
So if you go back throughhistory, many historical figures
and presidents and diplomatshave all stressed the importance
of the Navy.
When I was on active duty andyou too, Al Reagan was president
he made it a goal to build theNavy up to a 600-ship Navy.
We almost got there back in the80s, but now the Navy is in
dire straits.
As a Navy man, I would call itin extremis that's a nautical
(07:33):
term when your ship is in dangerand about to have a collision
or you're entering combat,whatever.
In extremis is an expressionthat means extreme danger, and
we're now in a position wherethe Navy is extremely stressed,
overcommitted.
We don't have nearly the numberof ships we should have.
(07:53):
We have manpower problems aswell.
So I've made it my business tobecome an expert on those topics
and have written extensively,as you alluded to, about that
and what it means to the defenseof our nation.
Al Palmer (08:12):
Well, you know, as I think about it, back about that
time when Reagan was in office,you know I was back in
Washington in the Bureau, but wewere then, like you say,
fighting to keep 600 ships, butthat was way down from the
earlier 70s, as I recall.
We were up around 700 or 800 atthe end of Vietnam.
(08:36):
But even if you go back furtherback into World War II, didn't
we have something like 6,000ships that we made, with
shipyards all across the country?
Brent Ramsey (08:47):
Right those shipyards all gone.
Al Palmer (08:49):
Have we gotten rid of that capability entirely?
Brent Ramsey (08:54):
Yeah, and back by the end of World War II we had
tremendous shipbuildingcapability and, like you said,
thousands and thousands of shipsand the industrial capacity to
build ships quickly, thousandsof them, and that you know
politics and peace breaking outand the nation turning its post
(09:18):
World War II.
And by the time I wascommissioned we had I don't know
the exact number, but we had, Ithink, something like around
800 ships when I wascommissioned in 1969.
And we shrunk further from thatto below that number and then
(09:42):
when Reagan was electedpresident, he decided to build
the Navy back up to 600 ships,but, just as a marker, 600 ships
we had at the end of Cold War.
Today, right now, we have 295ships and I would argue that the
world is a more dangerous placetoday than at any time since
(10:05):
the heightened threat situationwe were in during the worst
parts of the Cold War, where wewere worried about the Russians
or the Soviet Union.
Today we have hotspots all overthe world.
Obviously, what's going on inthe Middle East, where we're
having to keep ships on stationto try to keep the sea lanes
(10:28):
open.
We have the threat of China andthe Pacific, where they're
intent on dominating that wholeregion and really their goal is
to rule the world.
So their sights are set ontaking over Taiwan in the near
term and capturing thesuperconductor industry.
(10:48):
Taiwan leads the world inproduction of chips for our most
advanced computers.
China covets that, as well asthe land and the other
technology that is availablefrom Taiwan.
So you know, we've got a war inEurope.
I mean, like I said, we've gota.
There's no news to anybody thatwe have a dangerous world and
(11:11):
we rely on the Navy to keep thesea lanes open, keep commerce
flowing and to protect ournation's interests.
And the Navy has stretchedextremely thin right now.
It's just the conditions andthe ability for us to respond
(11:32):
and react to what's going onaround the world is very much
diminished.
And unfortunately, the Congresshas been asleep at the switch
and has not provided the money,has been asleep at the switch
and has not provided the moneynor the technical means to build
the Navy up to what it needs tobe to protect our nation's
(11:54):
interests.
Al Palmer (11:55):
So, as I recollect, just a couple of years ago the
Congress was challenged to dothat and I think they authorized
355 ships, as I recall in oneof the NDAAs then.
But that means we're short evenof what Congress authorized
before and probably funded.
Has the funding changed muchover the last couple of years,
(12:16):
or is that kind of steady?
Brent Ramsey (12:19):
You're right.
The Congress did finally,during Trump's term I think it
was about in 2017, around theirtimeframe increase the
requirement for Navy ships to355.
The Navy now says therequirement is 381.
We have 295 today.
(12:41):
Unfortunately, the Congressnever appropriated the money to
get that process underway, tobuild up the size of the fleet.
So, basically, since PresidentTrump's first term to today, the
number of ships in our forceshas been relatively stable,
(13:01):
static.
It fluctuates up and down yearby year and so, like I said, we
haven't really made any progressat all.
There was a slight increase, aslight bump in shipbuilding
funds, but right now we spend Ithink in the current NDAA
there's $35 billion allocatedfor shipbuilding.
(13:24):
Well, that's half a percent ofour federal budget.
Half a percent.
We spend five times as much onfood stamps as we spend on
building ships or welfare andvarious social programs.
(13:44):
So it's my opinion that ourCongress has been asleep at the
switch, has not put up the moneyneeded to build a strong and
robust Navy.
And the problem with that evenif today they reckon, oh, we
need way more ships, even ifthey appropriated double, triple
(14:06):
the size of the appropriationsfor the shipbuilding requirement
, you can't snap your fingersand make a naval vessel.
These are some of the mostcomplex machines on the planet.
A nuclear-powered aircraftcarrier You've been aboard
carriers planet.
(14:27):
A nuclear powered aircraftcarrier You've been aboard
carriers, you understand this.
I was stationed on theShangri-La.
That's an old World War IIvintage carrier.
But aircraft carrier is themost complicated machine on the
planet.
It took us 13 years to buildthe USS Ford, the newest
aircraft carrier, the first inthe Ford class carriers 13 years
(14:48):
.
So even if Congress appropriateddouble, triple, quadruple the
amount of money for shipbuildingtoday, it doesn't solve the
problem quickly because it takesan immense amount of time.
Ships are amazingly complex andit takes a long time.
Now, could there beimprovements in that process?
Certainly With the advent of AI, and we may talk about in this
(15:12):
interview, if you get to it,some of the Navy's failings on
how it's managed, theshipbuilding account and the
problems that we've had in.
Even after money is appropriatedfor building a certain classes
of ships, then the shipsthemselves turn out to be a dud,
like the lcs, for example, aso-called littoral combat ship,
(15:33):
where we spent uh billions andbillions on this new class of
ship and it turned out to be uha bust.
It's not a an effective.
In fact, we've already retirednine of them.
They were practically brand newships, only a few years old,
and we've put four of them outof commission.
(15:54):
We plan to decommission twomore and we plan to sell two
more to foreign navies.
So mistakes like that don'thelp the problem of getting up
to a higher number of ships thatwe need to defend the nation.
Al Palmer (16:11):
So that's a matter of requirements, maybe not being
on spot on, you know, and whatyou actually need to produce.
There also seems to be aproblem with the delays and the
(16:31):
diminishment of production overthe years of ships in the
shipyards to a workforce that'savailable to do that.
I mean, even if we wanted tosurge that to what level we
might need today to build theextra ships we need, where do we
find a workforce for that?
And do we still have the activeshipyards that could be put in
effect kind of overnight inorder to do that?
And do we still have the activeshipyards that could be put in
effect kind of overnight inorder to do that?
Brent Ramsey (16:49):
No, we don't.
Post-cold War, our nation, theDefense Department, orchestrated
a tremendous consolidation ofthe defense industries with the
recognition that the SovietUnion had fallen.
The conclusion was well, we candownsize our military, we can
(17:12):
downsize our industrial base.
So that was done deliberatelyto mothball a lot of our
shipbuilding capability and didnot a lot of our shipbuilding
capability and did not need tokeep a large Navy.
And so the fact is we have verylimited shipbuilding capability
(17:39):
that's in existence now.
It basically our commercialshipbuilding industry is
practically non-existent.
I mean, we produce a handful ofships, commercial ships per
year.
Navy combatant shipbuilding ishealthy and robust and we have a
number of very reliablecontractors big business,
(18:01):
huntington Ingalls and the shipbuilding that's going on now to
build our ships.
They're very good at what theydo for the most part, with the
exception of some of themistakes which I've mentioned.
The LCS, the Zumwalt class, isanother mistake, but generally
speaking, when we get around tobuilding our ships, they're very
(18:26):
good quality and they'reexactly what we need.
The problem is we just don'thave enough of them.
Now getting to your questionabout the industrial base itself
and the workforce, that's aproblem.
Now, those facilities, I mean weliterally had hundreds and
hundreds of shipbuildingfacilities at the end of World
War II.
(18:46):
Most of those still exist.
In other words, they weren'ttorn up and destroyed.
Those sophisticatedshipbuilding like dry docks and
the types of facilities you usefor building ships still exist.
They're dormant right now.
So there is some latentcapacity there to revive the
(19:08):
shipbuilding industry.
It's going to take money and infact the Navy and the
government has been investing alittle bit of money in recent
years in trying to refurbish andbring back into activity some
of these older shipyards, butit's very minimal effort.
Older shipyards, but it's veryminimal effort and it's going to
(19:30):
take quite a bit of time to.
You can't snap your fingers andbring a shipyard that's been
dormant for decades back intooperation again and of course it
would have to be upgraded tomodern technology and some of
that stuff too.
And the other aspect of thethat you mentioned the workforce
isn't there.
The trades in this country arenot a priority.
(19:56):
We our educational system fordecades now has emphasized.
You know, everybody go tocollege and so we have millions
and millions of high schoolstudents and they're all in the
track to go into college and getdegrees and whatever.
And so the actual trades thatyou need for industrial
(20:17):
operations like shipbuilding arevery, very meager in this
country.
Again, there have been someefforts by the Navy to try to
boost that.
There's some defense moneythat's actually gone to invest
in developing the trades.
But, for example, welding asyou might imagine you're a Navy
man, you know this Buildingships there's a lot of welding
(20:39):
involved.
Like I say, there's steel shipsor steel and aluminum composite
or whatever, and there's a lotof welding that's involved.
To create a master welder, thisis a very it sounds like wow,
it's a trade.
How complicated could it be?
It takes five years to train amaster welder Five years just to
train one.
Okay, we need thousands andthousands of tradesmen like that
(21:04):
welders and ship fitters andelectricians and you name it,
all the trades it takes to buildthese massive ships.
I mean people don't understandif they're not close to the Navy
.
The Ford displaces 100,000 tons.
It's the most complex objectcreated by man on the planet,
(21:25):
right, and it takes very skilledpeople to be able to put those
things together.
Like I said earlier, it took 13years to build the Ford.
Now, that's outrageous.
It shouldn't take that long tobuild anything, even that
complex a ship, but that's whatit takes.
So we're in a hole now with notenough ships, hotspots all over
(21:45):
the world, the Navy beingovertasked and expanding a lot
of our ordinance, like what hashappened in the Middle East,
because we've been using milliondollar SM3 or 2 or 6 missiles
to shoot down thousand dollardrones.
And that's a national policyissue we probably shouldn't get
(22:09):
into.
But you know, we're in extremis.
I'll use that term again.
The Navy is in extremis.
If an actual shooting war brokeout right now with China, we
would be seriously, seriouslychallenged to come out on top
and the war games reflect that.
The war games reflect that.
(22:29):
If we got into a war with Chinain the Indo-Pacific.
We would probably win, but itwould be at a serious, serious
cost the loss of many ships,capital ships and thousands of
sailors dead.
Al Palmer (22:45):
So it's a very interesting point, though, about
the state of the defenseindustrial base.
When it comes to shipbuilding,as you say, there's lots of
places that are sort of dormantnow, but it's that surge that
needs to take place.
So is it the Navy that needs topush that, or is it the
political side?
Who is going to be the moverand shaker that gets that going?
(23:09):
Who is going to be the moverand shaker that gets that going?
Or is it the industry itselfcoming alive and saying look, we
recognize that there's money tobe made and things to be done.
We'll go out and find thepeople, we'll train them, we'll
get it up.
So who really has got the cardsthere to do that?
Brent Ramsey (23:27):
Well, the president has said he's going to
make it a priority to build upthe Navy.
He's said he's going to appointa commission on the Navy.
Now, the Congress appointed acommission on the Navy several
years ago.
I think it was in the 2023 NDAANational Defense Authorization
Act.
They appointed or created thiscommission on the Navy studying
(23:53):
the requirements for the Navy.
It never got even started.
So I mean, trump has promised.
President Trump should berespectful of our chief
executive.
President Trump has promisedthat he's going to make
shipbuilding a priority.
Now it's only 60 days in to his, or a little over 70 days into
(24:14):
his, term here.
I haven't seen much activitytake place yet.
Secretary Hegseth, theSecretary of Defense, has also
made similar statements.
The Navy, of course, has saidyes, we need more ships.
They've been saying for a longtime, so hopefully that's going
(24:36):
to happen, but I haven't seenmuch happen yet to get that
rolling and, like I said, youcannot snap your fingers and
bring ships online.
You know it takes even thesimplest ship.
We have wonderful ships.
Some of our ships are wonderful, absolutely the best on the
(24:57):
planet.
The Burke-class destroyers arejust a wonderful ship and we
have a lot of those, but we needa lot more.
But even those ships takeseveral years each to build and
that's an established productionline In two locations.
We've been building them forquite a long time now the Burke
class, and so we've got it downto a fine science now.
(25:21):
But even a more simple, smallership like a destroyer takes
years to build.
So we're in a very dangeroustime now in my opinion, that if
war breaks out, real war andaside from these flare-ups like
(25:42):
the skirmish in the Middle Eastand with the terrorists and what
we're doing to support the wareffort in Ukraine, if we get
into a shooting war with China,it's another whole ballgame.
The Chinese Navy is now 400ships okay, 400 combatants.
(26:04):
We have approximately 50combatants in the Pacific, have
approximately 50 combatants inthe Pacific, indo-pacific.
We may surge it up to 70 attimes.
But 50 to 70 of our ships Ishouldn't say combatants, that's
combat force, because part ofthe combat force is auxiliaries
that are used to resupply ourships at sea.
(26:25):
So it's about a two-thirds toone-third ratio.
So 400 ships the Chinese haveright in the South China Sea and
their offshore waters and wehave 50 to 70 combatants there.
Now our ships are superior totheirs, but they're catching up
(26:46):
because they've been stealingour technology for decades and
they've improved dramaticallythe nature of their.
It's called the plan People'sLiberation Army Navy.
Their plan is world-class nowand outnumbers us greatly.
On top of that they have anarmed Coast Guard of another 180
(27:09):
ships.
That Coast Guard is part of theNavy.
It works for the Navy.
It's not like our nation wherethe Coast Guard isn't even in
the Defense Department.
It works for the Department ofTransportation or Homeland
Security or Transportation, Iforget now I'm getting my
signals crossed here.
(27:30):
It's part of homeland security.
So in time of war the CoastGuard does chop to the Navy and
become part of the naval forces,but in peacetime it's not even
part of the Navy.
So in addition to the CoastGuard they have what's called
the maritime militia, which is aquasi-military collection of
(27:50):
smaller craft numbering over5,000 that they can also use for
military operations, forinterference with sea lanes and
with logistics support and allkinds of stuff.
It's called the maritimeitia.
So they have massive forces inthe Indo-Pacific and they are
(28:12):
intent on dominating in the nearterm the Indo-Pacific, taking
over Taiwan.
They harass and threaten Japan,the Philippines, our treaty
allies, australia, south Korea,constantly harassing and trying
to imitate.
It's called wolf warriortactics.
(28:34):
They use very aggressive at-seatechniques and tactics to try
to intimidate the navies ofother nations that have
sovereign territory in the SouthChina Sea.
That China attacks, basicallyeven has occupied some islands
that belong to other nations andbuilt bases on them.
(28:55):
So it's a real poser.
I mean, how are we going todefend our interest in the
Pacific with a Navy that is atreally a very weak point in time
at this point in time?
Al Palmer (29:09):
but, like you say, we're outnumbered now.
But it's not just the, the, thenumbers in this, it's also the
quality of the ships or thecapability.
If we have great capability inour ships, that's wonderful, and
we do.
But when you have the numbersthat are so much hugely
outbalanced, uh, if you're china, you can afford not to have the
(29:33):
greatest ships as long as youhave enough of them to overwhelm
the opposition.
So, yes, that puts them aheadright now.
And of course, they're buildingships for other people, aren't
they?
Brent Ramsey (29:45):
Well, yeah they're building.
Various reports have indicatedthat the Chinese shipbuilding
capacity is more than 2,200times the capacity of the US at
the current time.
That's how great they've builtup their shipbuilding industry.
And the other thing about theway the Chinese system works is
(30:06):
the despotic regime that it is.
Even the civilian shipbuildingcompanies are building civilian
craft.
Thousands of them come underthe umbrella of their military.
So the commercial ships are, toa degree, actually militarized
(30:27):
and the navy of the Chinese candictate to the commercial
shipbuilders what types of shipsthat they're going to build,
because those commercial shipscan be turned to military use
instantly if they need them.
So they have a relationship,they're welded together like
(30:50):
this, with the government of theregime dictating to the private
sector in China exactly how tobuild these ships.
And, like I said, they'recommercial ships but they're
militarized to a degree wherethey could be integrated into
their navy, their People'sLiberation Army Navy, instantly
(31:13):
and would fall under their chainof command.
So it's like having anotherwhole set of vessels that can,
and in that sense they havethousands, because they've
turned out thousands of ships inthe last 20, 30 years.
They have the biggestshipbuilding industry on the
planet.
Al Palmer (31:35):
So, looking at the ships that we have, though I
mean, like you say, many of themare absolutely great, some of
them are not so great, as we'vealso discussed but looking at
that whole lineup of ships,we're talking dozens or less in
some classes.
You know, compared to thenumbers that the Chinese have,
(31:57):
even though they're great,they're just so few of them that
you've got to scratch your headand say you know, they ought to
be awfully good to overcome thenumbers that the Chinese are
going to have, the numbers thatthe Chinese are going to have,
and that you know when you canstart with our carriers.
We used to have, when I wasstill in, 12 carriers at any
given time.
Not all of them, of course,were nuclear at the time either,
(32:20):
so they were a little easier tobuild, perhaps a little less
complicated.
But today, when we've got just11, they're not even all
deployable.
There's always a couple thatare down for maintenance,
overhaul or refueling withnuclear material.
So how do we go from that then,even to the other classes,
(32:43):
where you have even fewer, andsay, yeah, we're okay, we're not
okay?
Brent Ramsey (32:53):
and say, yeah, we're okay, we're not okay, no,
no, we would like.
Like I said, if we actually gotinto a shooting war with china
in the pacific, it would beextremely uh challenging uh.
One bright spot uh is oursubmarine force is far and by
far and away superior and uh toto any other on the planet and
(33:13):
uh, that would be a an advantagefor us because we could uh
quickly sink a lot of theirships with our very advanced
attack submarines.
And, uh, although they they areimproving, is that I said
earlier, they steal all ourtechnology.
Our security procedures are notvery good in this country.
(33:38):
We're not good at keepingsecrets.
I think I may have.
Well, I didn't mention in thisconversation, but I've written
about.
There's an entity called the USChina Economic and Security
Review Commission.
It's been in existence for thelast 25 years.
Congress created thiscommission several decades ago,
(34:00):
to their credit, and its purposeis to assess and evaluate what
is the nature of the threat fromChina, and that report
consistently shows that each andevery year, china steals about
$600 billion worth of ourtechnology and secrets, their
intelligence gathering capacityand our lack of discipline.
(34:26):
A lot of the research anddevelopment stuff is done
through universities.
There's over 300,000 Chinesethat study at our universities.
Why we allow Chinese to studyat our universities is beyond me
(34:47):
.
They don't make a secret of it.
They make public statementsabout we plan to rule the world.
We want to be the ruler of theentire world.
They consider themselves, themiddle kingdom, the most
important country, and so,technology-wise, we're a sieve.
We allow China to steal usblind.
(35:11):
If you ever looked at some ofthe advanced aircraft of the Air
Force, they look like ourairplanes.
Okay, if you can look at them.
Well, that looks like an F-16.
Well, that's funny, but it'sgot the Chinese crescent on it.
Al Palmer (35:34):
Well, they stole the plants, all these things.
Brent Ramsey (35:38):
I shouldn't be laughing, it's no laughing
matter.
But you know, they've stolen usblind and we continue to
persist.
I mean, even if only onepercent of the students who are
placed as students at advancedresearch universities the best
universities in the nation wherewe do a lot of this research
(35:59):
are spies, that's thousands ofspies that are stealing our tech
and exporting it back to China.
Why do you think theirairplanes look like our
airplanes and their ships arestarting to look like our ships?
Because they steal us blind,you know, and we just put up
with it.
So, people, if you, pew did asurgery, pew Research.
(36:21):
They do surveys all the time.
That's what they do.
Their most recent surgery.
What are the top 20 things thatconcern Americans?
What are the top 20 things thatconcern America?
You know illegal immigration,taxes, whatever it is.
There's a top 20 list.
They just put it out, the onethat came out a month or so ago.
China isn't on the list.
(36:43):
China doesn't concern theaverage American.
It concerns me because I've beenstudying it for years.
But the American public isblissfully ignorant of the fact
that China, in writing and intheir speeches, says we want to
rule the world, we plan to rulethe world by 2049.
(37:06):
We want to take over Taiwan.
We want to take over Taiwan,we're gonna take over Taiwan by
2027.
That's what they've saidpublicly, and on and on and on.
But our public is blissfullyignorant of the fact that we're
actually in a war.
I mean, senator Cotton, to hisvery great credit, has just
(37:26):
written a book which basicallysays we're at war with China.
Nobody talks about it, nobodyacknowledges it, but we're at
war with China.
They wanna rule the world andwe're sitting on our hands.
And the number one way we aregonna defend ourselves against
China is by having a strong Navy.
(37:47):
And we've allowed our Navy tobecome weak.
And that's Brent Ramsey's storyand I'm sticking to it.
Al Palmer (37:55):
And Brent, I'm right there with you.
I understand fully and it's sadfrom our perspective, now that
we're a little older, we havethat long view of what's
happened now in the Navy andit's sad.
I mean, like you say, when wewere in it was 600, 700 ships
that was meant to just recoverto that.
(38:19):
Now it's a fraction of that,almost half of it, and there we
go.
The other thing I noticed, bythe way, just talking about the
people, part of this, there wasan article today about the
Chinese being discoveredbringing people in through
Florida and Coral Gables andthere's, all of a sudden a
concentration of illegals comingin that way, being rounded up,
(38:44):
and someone said, why in Florida?
Why, all of a sudden, theselarge numbers of Chinese showing
up?
Well, it wasn't just there.
It's also been that case in thePacific, in Guam, in Hawaii,
the Philippines.
They're coming through that wayas well and they just kind of
get in and all of a suddenthey're here If they're not
(39:09):
going to school.
Are they terror cells?
Are they sleeper cells?
What are they?
So there's that aspect of ittoo that we just, like you say,
have been kind of sleeping atthe switch on.
Brent Ramsey (39:33):
Patriot Post on China and your listeners are
welcome to look at Patriot Post.
You could see those articles,but one of the articles talked
about illegal immigration andthe fact that in during the time
that Biden was president, anestimated 50,000 young male
Chinese illegally came into thiscountry.
(39:54):
So here it is, 2025.
We started deporting some ofthe massive numbers of millions
and millions who were illegallyallowed to come into this
country during Biden's watch,but there's 50,000 military age
fit male Chinese nationals inthis country.
(40:17):
What are they doing?
What are they up to?
They're no doubt they'remilitary trained individuals who
were sent through the pipelinewhich originates in Central
America and up through.
There was an actual wholeprocess.
There's all these NGOs and theUN and various other malign
(40:39):
actors were intent on ruiningAmerica, so they facilitated the
whole illegal immigration mess.
That was the policy of formerPresident Biden and with
millions and millions of peopleillegally coming into this
country, and under the cover ofthat, because they just blended
(41:03):
in, 50,000 Chinese were allowedto sneak into this country.
Now, what are they doing?
What are those 50,000 men doingin this country?
Where are they?
What are they up to?
Are they preparing to attackour military installations or
are they just subverting ourinstallations by illegally
(41:29):
taking photographs of militaryoperations in progress or
sneaking on the base?
In fact, a numbers of them haveactually been caught trying to
sneak on board some of ourmilitary bases.
Al Palmer (41:40):
So you know it's ridiculous.
Brent Ramsey (41:43):
We're asleep at the switch.
50,000 Chinese running aroundin our country and their regime
openly says we want to conquerAmerica.
Wake up America.
Al Palmer (41:58):
We're at war with China, and what makes that worse
is there's this kind of softcommunism or Marxism that's
taken place where, well, they'renot so bad, they're just trying
to level the playing field, youknow, and it's okay if we deal
with them because you know it'scommerce and all that.
No, it's not.
It's an ideology that'sdamaging to the country.
Brent Ramsey (42:22):
Yeah, I wrote about that.
In fact, my article today inthe Patriot Post is called China
Bane of Civilization, becausethey have mistreated all of
their neighbors.
I mean, they took over Tibet,they took over Hong Kong.
They're harassing Taiwan, thePhilippines, vietnam, australia,
(42:43):
you name it.
They're not a good neighbor andthey want to rule the world,
and they're doing it by anymeans necessary.
Plus, they have no moralcompunction.
They're an atheist nation,avowedly, officially an atheist
nation.
They don't have any moralvalues.
(43:05):
Cindy's putting up the timeArticle for today.
They don't have any compunctionabout doing whatever they have
to do in order to seek theirgoals of ruling us.
So it's a little off topic, butin order to defend ourselves.
(43:25):
It's my opinion and the opinionof many others, I think, in my
background information, goingback to Alfred Thay and Mahan,
teddy Roosevelt, ronald Reagan,walter Raleigh, the famous Brit
explorer, everybody historicalfigures have recognized for
hundreds of years that the pathto national greatness is through
(43:52):
a robust Navy, because theworld is mostly water, if you
haven't looked around, look at amap, look at a globe 70% of the
earth is covered with water.
We move people and goods bywater, and so it was recognized
(44:14):
by these great historicalfigures that it was important to
our nation's success and healthand well-being to have a robust
Navy from our founding.
One of the first things thefounders did was create a Navy
and an army.
Al Palmer (44:33):
Yeah, they did that to get off some of the piracy
out in the Mediterranean,exactly.
Brent Ramsey (44:41):
We had pirates preying on our trade and it was
hurting us economically.
So we commissioned theconstruction of six ships and
they went out and they started,you know, capturing and sinking
all these pirates and protectingour trade.
Yeah, the barbary pirates, yepexactly well so.
Al Palmer (44:59):
So getting back, though, to the way that that the
the world works with the navies, you know, one of the things we
used to have back in the the20s, uh, 30s, was, you know,
know, the China fleet.
We were very prominent in HongKong, for instance, philippines
and other ports, singapore, butyou know, we spent a lot of time
(45:23):
developing the Navy in thatpart of the world, making that
an ambassadorial kind of afunction within other nations,
and I remember spending a bit oftime in Hong Kong when I was on
the Constellation inpost-Vietnam time, but we were
always welcome there, eventhough they hadn't turned it
over yet.
In fact, that was the beauty ofit was the British were still
(45:46):
there, we were there, othernations were there, trade was
booming at the time in Hong Kong, and as soon as the British
allowed the Chinese to take over, that all just disappeared
overnight, with a promise thatthey would keep a lot of it.
They never did.
Brent Ramsey (46:05):
Yeah, we used to have more robust, even formal,
organizations.
You remember the old CETOorganization, which is kind of
an Asian version of NATO.
That's dissolved years and yearsago, but you know, it is true
that we need to keep a strongpresence in the Pacific.
(46:30):
We have Pacific parts of the USGuam is part of the United
States.
You know, hawaii is out in themiddle of the Pacific and so we
have strong relationships.
We have treaty alliesthroughout the Pacific Japan,
the Philippines, south Korea,australia, new Zealand.
(46:54):
We have even good relationswith Vietnam, for example.
We're not a treaty ally withVietnam, but other nations in
Asia are cognizant of the factthat China represents an
existential threat to them, sothey are receptive to having
(47:16):
bilateral relations with us andcooperating with us on defense
matters.
I mean, we've sold F-35s toSingapore.
I believe that's not a treatyally, but we've sold our newest,
best, most advanced aircraft,the F-35 Lightning.
There's three versions of it.
We've sold our newest, best,most advanced aircraft, the F-35
Lightning.
There's three versions of it.
We've sold I think we'reselling that aircraft to about
(47:41):
18 other countries worldwidebecause it's the best airplane
on the planet and they want toget in on the good deal.
So we do have a lot ofpotential friends in the Pacific
that would help in an actualconflict out there.
(48:02):
We've recently signed anagreement with the UK and
Australia to build Virginiaclass submarines for the
Australian Navy.
We are actually going tostation some Navy personnel in
Australia coming up in the nextyear or so.
So we are cognizant of the needto have these allies in the
(48:25):
Pacific and to strengthen themso that they can help us if we
get in a shooting war with China, which unfortunately looks
increasingly more likely tohappen in the coming years.
Al Palmer (48:39):
So if we do somehow manage to catch up a little bit
here in the next couple of yearsand develop more ships in a
little bit wider range, we stillend up, though, having a
problem of having the ability tomaintain them, to repair them
and also to man them.
We're a little behind on thepeople side, are we not right
(49:02):
now, when it comes tooperational readiness and the
way of ship deployments.
Brent Ramsey (49:18):
Well, yes, during the Biden term, recruiting was
very bad.
It was really a consequence, Ithink, of the political emphasis
of DEI and some of that othernonsense that President Trump is
now turning that stuff around.
It'll be hard to root that out.
So the recruiting numbers are,thankfully for all the services
are up.
But it is true what you justsaid the Navy's been very
shorthanded militarily.
(49:38):
I think two or three years in arow the Navy missed recruiting
goals by thousands.
So we're understaffed.
We're putting ships to sea.
You've been to sea duty, I'vebeen to sea duty.
There's nothing worse thansending a ship to sea with not a
full complement, because numberone ships are dangerous.
(49:59):
It's not like going on acaravan cruise.
That's a fun thing when you goon a Navy ship.
Al Palmer (50:09):
The fun is not part of the equation, okay.
Brent Ramsey (50:12):
It is hard, dangerous work.
As an aviator you know that waybetter than me.
I was in the service Navy butI'm a qualified officer of the
deck.
I can tell you I've been upclose and personal with a Soviet
Yankee for five days chasingthem in the North Atlantic.
Nothing about operating ashipboard is easy or not
(50:37):
potentially dangerous.
So it is absolutely foolishnessto send ships to sea without a
full compliment and it justwears out the crew, makes
everybody more tired than theyshould be, and tired sailors
create accidents and I've seen alot of at sea accidents so I
know what I'm talking about.
(50:57):
So under the best ofcircumstances, navy ships at sea
operating in a lot of time,very extreme I've been.
I've sailed above the arcticcircle where your nose will
freeze off, uh, you know justvery, very arduous conditions.
Saltwater is very corrosive.
It's a constant effort to tryto keep the ship repaired and
(51:21):
functioning and I know I'mpreaching to the choir because
you've got probably more seaduty than I have, but it is true
that we are desperately shortof people.
The admiral in charge of FleetForces Command has publicly
stated the Navy is not meetingits readiness goals.
We're supposed to have theability to quickly ready and
(51:44):
sortie to see 75 ships in anemergency right, 75 ships.
We're supposed to be able toman them up, get them to sea
quickly to respond to somecrisis anywhere in the world.
That's what our Navy is taskedby mission to do.
Admiral Caudill says we can getmaybe 50 ships to sea in that
(52:05):
time frame.
So we're at two-thirds of themetric, and even that, 75 ships.
Like I said, the world is 70%ocean.
There could be a crisis on 70%of the planet, somewhere that we
need to put Navy ships onstation, or even a humanitarian
situation.
There's a typhoon in Asia andwe're going to provide support,
(52:28):
humanitarian support, so we needto get ships over there to help
out with the situation, rescuepeople from the earthquake in
Myanmar, whatever it is.
We don't have the ships.
We don't have the manpower.
So fortunately, with PresidentTrump in charge now, he has said
he's going to rebuild the Navy.
Recruiting numbers are up andthat's good.
(52:49):
If we really can root out thepolitical nonsense from the
military and make a better pitchto the youth of America, maybe
more people will want to join.
But we do need to put anemphasis in the trades.
It's not just college graduatesthat we need for the Navy.
(53:10):
We need people who have thosekind of skills that can, if they
decide not to join the military, they can go into the defense
industry and they can become awelder or electrician or
whatever it is and they can helpbuild the ships that we need.
But those are emphasis that ourcountry should make to rebuild
the industrial base and to beable to build the weapon systems
(53:33):
that we need in order to defendthe country.
Al Palmer (53:37):
Well, let's hope that that's going to happen.
I know that the Commission onDefense Readiness reported that
to the Congress here just lastyear before the election,
talking about how behind we wereboth in the Navy side as well
as the defense industrial base,and that's all going to, I think
(53:58):
, happen because of what thepresident is doing.
I think you're right, fred.
I'm hopeful that that comesabout sooner rather than later,
but your writings on thatcertainly are very influential,
I think, and we're happy to haveyou here with STARS to be able
to talk about that the way wehave today, and I hope our
listeners will actually go toour website and read some more
(54:22):
about what you've written aboutthis.
It's very important work.
You know that we're doing and Ithink we're making some way here
.
But you're right, we've gotsome headwinds ahead of us here,
but thanks to people like you,I think we're making some way
here.
But you're right, we've gotsome headwinds ahead of us here,
but thanks to people like you,I think we're going to do it
thanks al and it's great havingyou with us, sir.
(54:44):
Thanks for all that you do bothfor us, for the calvert crew, uh
, and keeping the fleet uh inmotion.
Uh, hopefully it'll getshipbuilding going again.
And thanks again, brent, forbeing with us.
Brent Ramsey (54:57):
My pleasure.
Al Palmer (54:59):
And our audience will leave Brent's worthy writings
available to you online, alongwith our podcast archive.
There, too, you can look backand see what we had also done
about the book that Calvert didon Don't Give Up the Ship, which
is part of what we're talkingabout today as well.
So, brent, thanks again to ouraudience.
(55:21):
We'll look forward to seeingyou again next week for another
exciting episode of Stars andStripes.
Thanks for watching.
Well, hello America.
This is your host, Commander AlPalmer of STARRS and Stripes.
It's good to have you back withus again.
I think we're going to have avery interesting show today.
Again, I think we're going tohave a very interesting show
today.
We're going to talk a little bitabout our United States Navy
its condition, the things thatit's got that are going so well
(00:31):
for it, as we always have butalso some of the challenges that
it faces going forward.
The Navy is an important partof our defense establishment.
Why?
Because the power of the seasestablishment.
Why?
Because the power of the seas,with two oceans on either side
of us, makes it one of thedriving forces in both commerce
as well as defense.
So having a strong navy todefend our external waterways is
(00:56):
important, and we're very goodat that.
We have been for many years.
But sometimes that gets offtrack when funding goes away or
when politics may change it, andwe're going to talk about that
today with one of my favoritepeople, captain Brent Ramsey.
Brent is a career naval officer, surface officer a little bit
(01:20):
of time in submarines, I think,along the way, but he's been a
defense writer for years.
He's written very extensivelyon the Navy, the problems and
the advantages that we do have,and it's great to have him with
us, both as a writer but also aspart of STARRS.
He's on our Board of Advisorsfor STARRS as well as on the
(01:41):
Board of Advisors for theCaliber Task Group, and he's
been very active in trying tokeep the Navy strong today.
And, brent, it's great to haveyou with us again.
Welcome back to STARRS andStripes.
Brent Ramsey (01:59):
Thanks so much Al Appreciate it.
Al Palmer (02:03):
So tell us a little bit about how you got involved
in the Navy.
We all ended up, probably withsome relation or some way of
wanting to get into the Navy.
What was your story?
How did you get into the Navy?
Brent Ramsey (02:16):
Well, I'm a Navy brat.
My dad went into the Navy in1942, right after Pearl Harbor
and saw a lot of combat in boththe Atlantic and Pacific during
the war.
And then, after the war wasover, he decided to make the
Navy his career.
So I grew up.
I was born in a Navy hospital.
I grew up in the Navy, movedall around the country following
(02:42):
my dad and he's a retiredMaster Chief.
He's buried.
He and my mom were both buriedin Arlington.
At any rate, there was noquestion what I was going to do
growing up, because my dad toldme I was going in the.
Navy and back in those days youdid what your old man said.
So I was commissioned throughthe NROTC program at the
(03:07):
University of Nebraska, lincoln,nebraska, in 1969.
And, like you said, I spent mylife, most of it, in the Navy,
both on active duty as areserves officer and also Navy
civil service, and I even workedfor the Navy for a while as a
contractor.
So altogether about 40 years ofexperience with the Navy in a
while as a contractor.
So altogether about 40 years ofexperience with the Navy in a
lot of different areas some seaduty, a lot of time ashore, a
(03:31):
lot of time with the SeabeesCombat Engineer Force for the
Navy.
And how I got into my study moredetailed study after I retired
of the Navy at some junctureback in 2015 about I found
(03:51):
myself on the military advisorygroup from Congressman Mark
Meadows.
At the time my wife and I livedin Western North Carolina in
Mark's district and he had beenelected to Congress and a friend
of mine, Shanghai, got me onhis military advisory group and
he said hey, brent, you and theothers on my advisory group
(04:14):
write articles about themilitary so that I can comment
on them, so I'll know whatissues are facing the military
and it will strengthen myability to do things helpful to
the national defense.
So I started writing in 2017and I've continued that, just
today published another articleon China in a venue called the
(04:39):
Patriot Post.
Al Palmer (04:43):
So as a service brat, you saw all of the workings of
the military from inside, whichobviously helped you get adapted
to the Navy, probably easierthan the average bear right.
Brent Ramsey (04:55):
Well, yeah, I was stationed all over the place,
shipboard, ashore, with the EODcommunity, with the Seabees,
with the P3 community.
I had extensive experience allover the world really and saw a
lot of different elements of theNavy and as a civilian I spent
(05:19):
the majority of my time as acivilian with the Seabees, but a
lot of it was also with theoceanographic community.
So really, my 40-year career Igot exposure to virtually every
part of the Navy.
I didn't really have anyexposure per se to the submarine
community other than one day asa midshipman, a familiarization
(05:41):
cruise on an old diesel boat.
But I was stationed on anaircraft carrier, I was on a tin
can, I was on a cruiser, anuclear-powered cruiser.
Like I said, a lot of shoreduty all around the world and,
like I said, I've made it mybusiness since I retired.
I like to tell my friends,retirement is a myth.
If you have an active mind andan interest in our country, you
(06:04):
never really retire.
So I've been involved in, youknow, veterans issues since I
retired, belong to MOA, NavalInstitute, Association of the
United States Navy, Navy Leagueof the United States Navy League
of the United States and havedone what I can to stay current
(06:25):
on what the Navy is doing.
You know, strategically youmentioned in your intro we're a
maritime nation From ourfounding.
Even before our founding,everybody knew it was important
for us to have a strong navy.
We're surrounded by water onthree sides.
(06:46):
We have more water coastlinepractically than any other
nation on earth.
90% of the commerce in theworld goes by sea.
Just about 70% of the commercethat US itself depends on
transportation by sea.
Itself depends ontransportation by sea.
(07:09):
So if you go back throughhistory, many historical figures
and presidents and diplomatshave all stressed the importance
of the Navy.
When I was on active duty andyou too, Al Reagan was president
he made it a goal to build theNavy up to a 600-ship Navy.
We almost got there back in the80s, but now the Navy is in
dire straits.
As a Navy man, I would call itin extremis that's a nautical
(07:33):
term when your ship is in dangerand about to have a collision
or you're entering combat,whatever.
In extremis is an expressionthat means extreme danger, and
we're now in a position wherethe Navy is extremely stressed,
overcommitted.
We don't have nearly the numberof ships we should have.
(07:53):
We have manpower problems aswell.
So I've made it my business tobecome an expert on those topics
and have written extensively,as you alluded to, about that
and what it means to the defenseof our nation.
Al Palmer (08:12):
Well, you know, as I think about it, back about that
time when Reagan was in office,you know I was back in
Washington in the Bureau, but wewere then, like you say,
fighting to keep 600 ships, butthat was way down from the
earlier 70s, as I recall.
We were up around 700 or 800 atthe end of Vietnam.
(08:36):
But even if you go back furtherback into World War II, didn't
we have something like 6,000ships that we made, with
shipyards all across the country?
Brent Ramsey (08:47):
Right those shipyards all gone.
Al Palmer (08:49):
Have we gotten rid of that capability entirely?
Brent Ramsey (08:54):
Yeah, and back by the end of World War II we had
tremendous shipbuildingcapability and, like you said,
thousands and thousands of shipsand the industrial capacity to
build ships quickly, thousandsof them, and that you know
politics and peace breaking outand the nation turning its post
(09:18):
World War II.
And by the time I wascommissioned we had I don't know
the exact number, but we had, Ithink, something like around
800 ships when I wascommissioned in 1969.
And we shrunk further from thatto below that number and then
(09:42):
when Reagan was electedpresident, he decided to build
the Navy back up to 600 ships,but, just as a marker, 600 ships
we had at the end of Cold War.
Today, right now, we have 295ships and I would argue that the
world is a more dangerous placetoday than at any time since
(10:05):
the heightened threat situationwe were in during the worst
parts of the Cold War, where wewere worried about the Russians
or the Soviet Union.
Today we have hotspots all overthe world.
Obviously, what's going on inthe Middle East, where we're
having to keep ships on stationto try to keep the sea lanes
(10:28):
open.
We have the threat of China andthe Pacific, where they're
intent on dominating that wholeregion and really their goal is
to rule the world.
So their sights are set ontaking over Taiwan in the near
term and capturing thesuperconductor industry.
(10:48):
Taiwan leads the world inproduction of chips for our most
advanced computers.
China covets that, as well asthe land and the other
technology that is availablefrom Taiwan.
So you know, we've got a war inEurope.
I mean, like I said, we've gota.
There's no news to anybody thatwe have a dangerous world and
(11:11):
we rely on the Navy to keep thesea lanes open, keep commerce
flowing and to protect ournation's interests.
And the Navy has stretchedextremely thin right now.
It's just the conditions andthe ability for us to respond
(11:32):
and react to what's going onaround the world is very much
diminished.
And unfortunately, the Congresshas been asleep at the switch
and has not provided the money,has been asleep at the switch
and has not provided the moneynor the technical means to build
the Navy up to what it needs tobe to protect our nation's
(11:54):
interests.
Al Palmer (11:55):
So, as I recollect, just a couple of years ago the
Congress was challenged to dothat and I think they authorized
355 ships, as I recall in oneof the NDAAs then.
But that means we're short evenof what Congress authorized
before and probably funded.
Has the funding changed muchover the last couple of years,
(12:16):
or is that kind of steady?
Brent Ramsey (12:19):
You're right.
The Congress did finally,during Trump's term I think it
was about in 2017, around theirtimeframe increase the
requirement for Navy ships to355.
The Navy now says therequirement is 381.
We have 295 today.
(12:41):
Unfortunately, the Congressnever appropriated the money to
get that process underway, tobuild up the size of the fleet.
So, basically, since PresidentTrump's first term to today, the
number of ships in our forceshas been relatively stable,
(13:01):
static.
It fluctuates up and down yearby year and so, like I said, we
haven't really made any progressat all.
There was a slight increase, aslight bump in shipbuilding
funds, but right now we spend Ithink in the current NDAA
there's $35 billion allocatedfor shipbuilding.
(13:24):
Well, that's half a percent ofour federal budget.
Half a percent.
We spend five times as much onfood stamps as we spend on
building ships or welfare andvarious social programs.
(13:44):
So it's my opinion that ourCongress has been asleep at the
switch, has not put up the moneyneeded to build a strong and
robust Navy.
And the problem with that evenif today they reckon, oh, we
need way more ships, even ifthey appropriated double, triple
(14:06):
the size of the appropriationsfor the shipbuilding requirement
, you can't snap your fingersand make a naval vessel.
These are some of the mostcomplex machines on the planet.
A nuclear-powered aircraftcarrier You've been aboard
carriers planet.
(14:27):
A nuclear powered aircraftcarrier You've been aboard
carriers, you understand this.
I was stationed on theShangri-La.
That's an old World War IIvintage carrier.
But aircraft carrier is themost complicated machine on the
planet.
It took us 13 years to buildthe USS Ford, the newest
aircraft carrier, the first inthe Ford class carriers 13 years
(14:48):
.
So even if Congress appropriateddouble, triple, quadruple the
amount of money for shipbuildingtoday, it doesn't solve the
problem quickly because it takesan immense amount of time.
Ships are amazingly complex andit takes a long time.
Now, could there beimprovements in that process?
Certainly With the advent of AI, and we may talk about in this
(15:12):
interview, if you get to it,some of the Navy's failings on
how it's managed, theshipbuilding account and the
problems that we've had in.
Even after money is appropriatedfor building a certain classes
of ships, then the shipsthemselves turn out to be a dud,
like the lcs, for example, aso-called littoral combat ship,
(15:33):
where we spent uh billions andbillions on this new class of
ship and it turned out to be uha bust.
It's not a an effective.
In fact, we've already retirednine of them.
They were practically brand newships, only a few years old,
and we've put four of them outof commission.
(15:54):
We plan to decommission twomore and we plan to sell two
more to foreign navies.
So mistakes like that don'thelp the problem of getting up
to a higher number of ships thatwe need to defend the nation.
Al Palmer (16:11):
So that's a matter of requirements, maybe not being
on spot on, you know, and whatyou actually need to produce.
There also seems to be aproblem with the delays and the
(16:31):
diminishment of production overthe years of ships in the
shipyards to a workforce that'savailable to do that.
I mean, even if we wanted tosurge that to what level we
might need today to build theextra ships we need, where do we
find a workforce for that?
And do we still have the activeshipyards that could be put in
effect kind of overnight inorder to do that?
And do we still have the activeshipyards that could be put in
effect kind of overnight inorder to do that?
Brent Ramsey (16:49):
No, we don't.
Post-cold War, our nation, theDefense Department, orchestrated
a tremendous consolidation ofthe defense industries with the
recognition that the SovietUnion had fallen.
The conclusion was well, we candownsize our military, we can
(17:12):
downsize our industrial base.
So that was done deliberatelyto mothball a lot of our
shipbuilding capability and didnot a lot of our shipbuilding
capability and did not need tokeep a large Navy.
And so the fact is we have verylimited shipbuilding capability
(17:39):
that's in existence now.
It basically our commercialshipbuilding industry is
practically non-existent.
I mean, we produce a handful ofships, commercial ships per
year.
Navy combatant shipbuilding ishealthy and robust and we have a
number of very reliablecontractors big business,
(18:01):
huntington Ingalls and the shipbuilding that's going on now to
build our ships.
They're very good at what theydo for the most part, with the
exception of some of themistakes which I've mentioned.
The LCS, the Zumwalt class, isanother mistake, but generally
speaking, when we get around tobuilding our ships, they're very
(18:26):
good quality and they'reexactly what we need.
The problem is we just don'thave enough of them.
Now getting to your questionabout the industrial base itself
and the workforce, that's aproblem.
Now, those facilities, I mean weliterally had hundreds and
hundreds of shipbuildingfacilities at the end of World
War II.
(18:46):
Most of those still exist.
In other words, they weren'ttorn up and destroyed.
Those sophisticatedshipbuilding like dry docks and
the types of facilities you usefor building ships still exist.
They're dormant right now.
So there is some latentcapacity there to revive the
(19:08):
shipbuilding industry.
It's going to take money and infact the Navy and the
government has been investing alittle bit of money in recent
years in trying to refurbish andbring back into activity some
of these older shipyards, butit's very minimal effort.
Older shipyards, but it's veryminimal effort and it's going to
(19:30):
take quite a bit of time to.
You can't snap your fingers andbring a shipyard that's been
dormant for decades back intooperation again and of course it
would have to be upgraded tomodern technology and some of
that stuff too.
And the other aspect of thethat you mentioned the workforce
isn't there.
The trades in this country arenot a priority.
(19:56):
We our educational system fordecades now has emphasized.
You know, everybody go tocollege and so we have millions
and millions of high schoolstudents and they're all in the
track to go into college and getdegrees and whatever.
And so the actual trades thatyou need for industrial
(20:17):
operations like shipbuilding arevery, very meager in this
country.
Again, there have been someefforts by the Navy to try to
boost that.
There's some defense moneythat's actually gone to invest
in developing the trades.
But, for example, welding asyou might imagine you're a Navy
man, you know this Buildingships there's a lot of welding
(20:39):
involved.
Like I say, there's steel shipsor steel and aluminum composite
or whatever, and there's a lotof welding that's involved.
To create a master welder, thisis a very it sounds like wow,
it's a trade.
How complicated could it be?
It takes five years to train amaster welder Five years just to
train one.
Okay, we need thousands andthousands of tradesmen like that
(21:04):
welders and ship fitters andelectricians and you name it,
all the trades it takes to buildthese massive ships.
I mean people don't understandif they're not close to the Navy
.
The Ford displaces 100,000 tons.
It's the most complex objectcreated by man on the planet,
(21:25):
right, and it takes very skilledpeople to be able to put those
things together.
Like I said earlier, it took 13years to build the Ford.
Now, that's outrageous.
It shouldn't take that long tobuild anything, even that
complex a ship, but that's whatit takes.
So we're in a hole now with notenough ships, hotspots all over
(21:45):
the world, the Navy beingovertasked and expanding a lot
of our ordinance, like what hashappened in the Middle East,
because we've been using milliondollar SM3 or 2 or 6 missiles
to shoot down thousand dollardrones.
And that's a national policyissue we probably shouldn't get
(22:09):
into.
But you know, we're in extremis.
I'll use that term again.
The Navy is in extremis.
If an actual shooting war brokeout right now with China, we
would be seriously, seriouslychallenged to come out on top
and the war games reflect that.
The war games reflect that.
(22:29):
If we got into a war with Chinain the Indo-Pacific.
We would probably win, but itwould be at a serious, serious
cost the loss of many ships,capital ships and thousands of
sailors dead.
Al Palmer (22:45):
So it's a very interesting point, though, about
the state of the defenseindustrial base.
When it comes to shipbuilding,as you say, there's lots of
places that are sort of dormantnow, but it's that surge that
needs to take place.
So is it the Navy that needs topush that, or is it the
political side?
Who is going to be the moverand shaker that gets that going?
(23:09):
Who is going to be the moverand shaker that gets that going?
Or is it the industry itselfcoming alive and saying look, we
recognize that there's money tobe made and things to be done.
We'll go out and find thepeople, we'll train them, we'll
get it up.
So who really has got the cardsthere to do that?
Brent Ramsey (23:27):
Well, the president has said he's going to
make it a priority to build upthe Navy.
He's said he's going to appointa commission on the Navy.
Now, the Congress appointed acommission on the Navy several
years ago.
I think it was in the 2023 NDAANational Defense Authorization
Act.
They appointed or created thiscommission on the Navy studying
(23:53):
the requirements for the Navy.
It never got even started.
So I mean, trump has promised.
President Trump should berespectful of our chief
executive.
President Trump has promisedthat he's going to make
shipbuilding a priority.
Now it's only 60 days in to his, or a little over 70 days into
(24:14):
his, term here.
I haven't seen much activitytake place yet.
Secretary Hegseth, theSecretary of Defense, has also
made similar statements.
The Navy, of course, has saidyes, we need more ships.
They've been saying for a longtime, so hopefully that's going
(24:36):
to happen, but I haven't seenmuch happen yet to get that
rolling and, like I said, youcannot snap your fingers and
bring ships online.
You know it takes even thesimplest ship.
We have wonderful ships.
Some of our ships are wonderful, absolutely the best on the
(24:57):
planet.
The Burke-class destroyers arejust a wonderful ship and we
have a lot of those, but we needa lot more.
But even those ships takeseveral years each to build and
that's an established productionline In two locations.
We've been building them forquite a long time now the Burke
class, and so we've got it downto a fine science now.
(25:21):
But even a more simple, smallership like a destroyer takes
years to build.
So we're in a very dangeroustime now in my opinion, that if
war breaks out, real war andaside from these flare-ups like
(25:42):
the skirmish in the Middle Eastand with the terrorists and what
we're doing to support the wareffort in Ukraine, if we get
into a shooting war with China,it's another whole ballgame.
The Chinese Navy is now 400ships okay, 400 combatants.
(26:04):
We have approximately 50combatants in the Pacific, have
approximately 50 combatants inthe Pacific, indo-pacific.
We may surge it up to 70 attimes.
But 50 to 70 of our ships Ishouldn't say combatants, that's
combat force, because part ofthe combat force is auxiliaries
that are used to resupply ourships at sea.
(26:25):
So it's about a two-thirds toone-third ratio.
So 400 ships the Chinese haveright in the South China Sea and
their offshore waters and wehave 50 to 70 combatants there.
Now our ships are superior totheirs, but they're catching up
(26:46):
because they've been stealingour technology for decades and
they've improved dramaticallythe nature of their.
It's called the plan People'sLiberation Army Navy.
Their plan is world-class nowand outnumbers us greatly.
On top of that they have anarmed Coast Guard of another 180
(27:09):
ships.
That Coast Guard is part of theNavy.
It works for the Navy.
It's not like our nation wherethe Coast Guard isn't even in
the Defense Department.
It works for the Department ofTransportation or Homeland
Security or Transportation, Iforget now I'm getting my
signals crossed here.
(27:30):
It's part of homeland security.
So in time of war the CoastGuard does chop to the Navy and
become part of the naval forces,but in peacetime it's not even
part of the Navy.
So in addition to the CoastGuard they have what's called
the maritime militia, which is aquasi-military collection of
(27:50):
smaller craft numbering over5,000 that they can also use for
military operations, forinterference with sea lanes and
with logistics support and allkinds of stuff.
It's called the maritimeitia.
So they have massive forces inthe Indo-Pacific and they are
(28:12):
intent on dominating in the nearterm the Indo-Pacific, taking
over Taiwan.
They harass and threaten Japan,the Philippines, our treaty
allies, australia, south Korea,constantly harassing and trying
to imitate.
It's called wolf warriortactics.
(28:34):
They use very aggressive at-seatechniques and tactics to try
to intimidate the navies ofother nations that have
sovereign territory in the SouthChina Sea.
That China attacks, basicallyeven has occupied some islands
that belong to other nations andbuilt bases on them.
(28:55):
So it's a real poser.
I mean, how are we going todefend our interest in the
Pacific with a Navy that is atreally a very weak point in time
at this point in time?
Al Palmer (29:09):
but, like you say, we're outnumbered now.
But it's not just the, the, thenumbers in this, it's also the
quality of the ships or thecapability.
If we have great capability inour ships, that's wonderful, and
we do.
But when you have the numbersthat are so much hugely
outbalanced, uh, if you're china, you can afford not to have the
(29:33):
greatest ships as long as youhave enough of them to overwhelm
the opposition.
So, yes, that puts them aheadright now.
And of course, they're buildingships for other people, aren't
they?
Brent Ramsey (29:45):
Well, yeah they're building.
Various reports have indicatedthat the Chinese shipbuilding
capacity is more than 2,200times the capacity of the US at
the current time.
That's how great they've builtup their shipbuilding industry.
And the other thing about theway the Chinese system works is
(30:06):
the despotic regime that it is.
Even the civilian shipbuildingcompanies are building civilian
craft.
Thousands of them come underthe umbrella of their military.
So the commercial ships are, toa degree, actually militarized
(30:27):
and the navy of the Chinese candictate to the commercial
shipbuilders what types of shipsthat they're going to build,
because those commercial shipscan be turned to military use
instantly if they need them.
So they have a relationship,they're welded together like
(30:50):
this, with the government of theregime dictating to the private
sector in China exactly how tobuild these ships.
And, like I said, they'recommercial ships but they're
militarized to a degree wherethey could be integrated into
their navy, their People'sLiberation Army Navy, instantly
(31:13):
and would fall under their chainof command.
So it's like having anotherwhole set of vessels that can,
and in that sense they havethousands, because they've
turned out thousands of ships inthe last 20, 30 years.
They have the biggestshipbuilding industry on the
planet.
Al Palmer (31:35):
So, looking at the ships that we have, though I
mean, like you say, many of themare absolutely great, some of
them are not so great, as we'vealso discussed but looking at
that whole lineup of ships,we're talking dozens or less in
some classes.
You know, compared to thenumbers that the Chinese have,
(31:57):
even though they're great,they're just so few of them that
you've got to scratch your headand say you know, they ought to
be awfully good to overcome thenumbers that the Chinese are
going to have, the numbers thatthe Chinese are going to have,
and that you know when you canstart with our carriers.
We used to have, when I wasstill in, 12 carriers at any
given time.
Not all of them, of course,were nuclear at the time either,
(32:20):
so they were a little easier tobuild, perhaps a little less
complicated.
But today, when we've got just11, they're not even all
deployable.
There's always a couple thatare down for maintenance,
overhaul or refueling withnuclear material.
So how do we go from that then,even to the other classes,
(32:43):
where you have even fewer, andsay, yeah, we're okay, we're not
okay?
Brent Ramsey (32:53):
and say, yeah, we're okay, we're not okay, no,
no, we would like.
Like I said, if we actually gotinto a shooting war with china
in the pacific, it would beextremely uh challenging uh.
One bright spot uh is oursubmarine force is far and by
far and away superior and uh toto any other on the planet and
(33:13):
uh, that would be a an advantagefor us because we could uh
quickly sink a lot of theirships with our very advanced
attack submarines.
And, uh, although they they areimproving, is that I said
earlier, they steal all ourtechnology.
Our security procedures are notvery good in this country.
(33:38):
We're not good at keepingsecrets.
I think I may have.
Well, I didn't mention in thisconversation, but I've written
about.
There's an entity called the USChina Economic and Security
Review Commission.
It's been in existence for thelast 25 years.
Congress created thiscommission several decades ago,
(34:00):
to their credit, and its purposeis to assess and evaluate what
is the nature of the threat fromChina, and that report
consistently shows that each andevery year, china steals about
$600 billion worth of ourtechnology and secrets, their
intelligence gathering capacityand our lack of discipline.
(34:26):
A lot of the research anddevelopment stuff is done
through universities.
There's over 300,000 Chinesethat study at our universities.
Why we allow Chinese to studyat our universities is beyond me
(34:47):
.
They don't make a secret of it.
They make public statementsabout we plan to rule the world.
We want to be the ruler of theentire world.
They consider themselves, themiddle kingdom, the most
important country, and so,technology-wise, we're a sieve.
We allow China to steal usblind.
(35:11):
If you ever looked at some ofthe advanced aircraft of the Air
Force, they look like ourairplanes.
Okay, if you can look at them.
Well, that looks like an F-16.
Well, that's funny, but it'sgot the Chinese crescent on it.
Al Palmer (35:34):
Well, they stole the plants, all these things.
Brent Ramsey (35:38):
I shouldn't be laughing, it's no laughing
matter.
But you know, they've stolen usblind and we continue to
persist.
I mean, even if only onepercent of the students who are
placed as students at advancedresearch universities the best
universities in the nation wherewe do a lot of this research
(35:59):
are spies, that's thousands ofspies that are stealing our tech
and exporting it back to China.
Why do you think theirairplanes look like our
airplanes and their ships arestarting to look like our ships?
Because they steal us blind,you know, and we just put up
with it.
So, people, if you, pew did asurgery, pew Research.
(36:21):
They do surveys all the time.
That's what they do.
Their most recent surgery.
What are the top 20 things thatconcern Americans?
What are the top 20 things thatconcern America?
You know illegal immigration,taxes, whatever it is.
There's a top 20 list.
They just put it out, the onethat came out a month or so ago.
China isn't on the list.
(36:43):
China doesn't concern theaverage American.
It concerns me because I've beenstudying it for years.
But the American public isblissfully ignorant of the fact
that China, in writing and intheir speeches, says we want to
rule the world, we plan to rulethe world by 2049.
(37:06):
We want to take over Taiwan.
We want to take over Taiwan,we're gonna take over Taiwan by
2027.
That's what they've saidpublicly, and on and on and on.
But our public is blissfullyignorant of the fact that we're
actually in a war.
I mean, senator Cotton, to hisvery great credit, has just
(37:26):
written a book which basicallysays we're at war with China.
Nobody talks about it, nobodyacknowledges it, but we're at
war with China.
They wanna rule the world andwe're sitting on our hands.
And the number one way we aregonna defend ourselves against
China is by having a strong Navy.
(37:47):
And we've allowed our Navy tobecome weak.
And that's Brent Ramsey's storyand I'm sticking to it.
Al Palmer (37:55):
And Brent, I'm right there with you.
I understand fully and it's sadfrom our perspective, now that
we're a little older, we havethat long view of what's
happened now in the Navy andit's sad.
I mean, like you say, when wewere in it was 600, 700 ships
that was meant to just recoverto that.
(38:19):
Now it's a fraction of that,almost half of it, and there we
go.
The other thing I noticed, bythe way, just talking about the
people, part of this, there wasan article today about the
Chinese being discoveredbringing people in through
Florida and Coral Gables andthere's, all of a sudden a
concentration of illegals comingin that way, being rounded up,
(38:44):
and someone said, why in Florida?
Why, all of a sudden, theselarge numbers of Chinese showing
up?
Well, it wasn't just there.
It's also been that case in thePacific, in Guam, in Hawaii,
the Philippines.
They're coming through that wayas well and they just kind of
get in and all of a suddenthey're here If they're not
(39:09):
going to school.
Are they terror cells?
Are they sleeper cells?
What are they?
So there's that aspect of ittoo that we just, like you say,
have been kind of sleeping atthe switch on.
Brent Ramsey (39:33):
Patriot Post on China and your listeners are
welcome to look at Patriot Post.
You could see those articles,but one of the articles talked
about illegal immigration andthe fact that in during the time
that Biden was president, anestimated 50,000 young male
Chinese illegally came into thiscountry.
(39:54):
So here it is, 2025.
We started deporting some ofthe massive numbers of millions
and millions who were illegallyallowed to come into this
country during Biden's watch,but there's 50,000 military age
fit male Chinese nationals inthis country.
(40:17):
What are they doing?
What are they up to?
They're no doubt they'remilitary trained individuals who
were sent through the pipelinewhich originates in Central
America and up through.
There was an actual wholeprocess.
There's all these NGOs and theUN and various other malign
(40:39):
actors were intent on ruiningAmerica, so they facilitated the
whole illegal immigration mess.
That was the policy of formerPresident Biden and with
millions and millions of peopleillegally coming into this
country, and under the cover ofthat, because they just blended
(41:03):
in, 50,000 Chinese were allowedto sneak into this country.
Now, what are they doing?
What are those 50,000 men doingin this country?
Where are they?
What are they up to?
Are they preparing to attackour military installations or
are they just subverting ourinstallations by illegally
(41:29):
taking photographs of militaryoperations in progress or
sneaking on the base?
In fact, a numbers of them haveactually been caught trying to
sneak on board some of ourmilitary bases.
Al Palmer (41:40):
So you know it's ridiculous.
Brent Ramsey (41:43):
We're asleep at the switch.
50,000 Chinese running aroundin our country and their regime
openly says we want to conquerAmerica.
Wake up America.
Al Palmer (41:58):
We're at war with China, and what makes that worse
is there's this kind of softcommunism or Marxism that's
taken place where, well, they'renot so bad, they're just trying
to level the playing field, youknow, and it's okay if we deal
with them because you know it'scommerce and all that.
No, it's not.
It's an ideology that'sdamaging to the country.
Brent Ramsey (42:22):
Yeah, I wrote about that.
In fact, my article today inthe Patriot Post is called China
Bane of Civilization, becausethey have mistreated all of
their neighbors.
I mean, they took over Tibet,they took over Hong Kong.
They're harassing Taiwan, thePhilippines, vietnam, australia,
(42:43):
you name it.
They're not a good neighbor andthey want to rule the world,
and they're doing it by anymeans necessary.
Plus, they have no moralcompunction.
They're an atheist nation,avowedly, officially an atheist
nation.
They don't have any moralvalues.
(43:05):
Cindy's putting up the timeArticle for today.
They don't have any compunctionabout doing whatever they have
to do in order to seek theirgoals of ruling us.
So it's a little off topic, butin order to defend ourselves.
(43:25):
It's my opinion and the opinionof many others, I think, in my
background information, goingback to Alfred Thay and Mahan,
teddy Roosevelt, ronald Reagan,walter Raleigh, the famous Brit
explorer, everybody historicalfigures have recognized for
hundreds of years that the pathto national greatness is through
(43:52):
a robust Navy, because theworld is mostly water, if you
haven't looked around, look at amap, look at a globe 70% of the
earth is covered with water.
We move people and goods bywater, and so it was recognized
(44:14):
by these great historicalfigures that it was important to
our nation's success and healthand well-being to have a robust
Navy from our founding.
One of the first things thefounders did was create a Navy
and an army.
Al Palmer (44:33):
Yeah, they did that to get off some of the piracy
out in the Mediterranean,exactly.
Brent Ramsey (44:41):
We had pirates preying on our trade and it was
hurting us economically.
So we commissioned theconstruction of six ships and
they went out and they started,you know, capturing and sinking
all these pirates and protectingour trade.
Yeah, the barbary pirates, yepexactly well so.
Al Palmer (44:59):
So getting back, though, to the way that that the
the world works with the navies, you know, one of the things we
used to have back in the the20s, uh, 30s, was, you know,
know, the China fleet.
We were very prominent in HongKong, for instance, philippines
and other ports, singapore, butyou know, we spent a lot of time
(45:23):
developing the Navy in thatpart of the world, making that
an ambassadorial kind of afunction within other nations,
and I remember spending a bit oftime in Hong Kong when I was on
the Constellation inpost-Vietnam time, but we were
always welcome there, eventhough they hadn't turned it
over yet.
In fact, that was the beauty ofit was the British were still
(45:46):
there, we were there, othernations were there, trade was
booming at the time in Hong Kong, and as soon as the British
allowed the Chinese to take over, that all just disappeared
overnight, with a promise thatthey would keep a lot of it.
They never did.
Brent Ramsey (46:05):
Yeah, we used to have more robust, even formal,
organizations.
You remember the old CETOorganization, which is kind of
an Asian version of NATO.
That's dissolved years and yearsago, but you know, it is true
that we need to keep a strongpresence in the Pacific.
(46:30):
We have Pacific parts of the USGuam is part of the United
States.
You know, hawaii is out in themiddle of the Pacific and so we
have strong relationships.
We have treaty alliesthroughout the Pacific Japan,
the Philippines, south Korea,australia, new Zealand.
(46:54):
We have even good relationswith Vietnam, for example.
We're not a treaty ally withVietnam, but other nations in
Asia are cognizant of the factthat China represents an
existential threat to them, sothey are receptive to having
(47:16):
bilateral relations with us andcooperating with us on defense
matters.
I mean, we've sold F-35s toSingapore.
I believe that's not a treatyally, but we've sold our newest,
best, most advanced aircraft,the F-35 Lightning.
There's three versions of it.
We've sold our newest, best,most advanced aircraft, the F-35
Lightning.
There's three versions of it.
We've sold I think we'reselling that aircraft to about
(47:41):
18 other countries worldwidebecause it's the best airplane
on the planet and they want toget in on the good deal.
So we do have a lot ofpotential friends in the Pacific
that would help in an actualconflict out there.
(48:02):
We've recently signed anagreement with the UK and
Australia to build Virginiaclass submarines for the
Australian Navy.
We are actually going tostation some Navy personnel in
Australia coming up in the nextyear or so.
So we are cognizant of the needto have these allies in the
(48:25):
Pacific and to strengthen themso that they can help us if we
get in a shooting war with China, which unfortunately looks
increasingly more likely tohappen in the coming years.
Al Palmer (48:39):
So if we do somehow manage to catch up a little bit
here in the next couple of yearsand develop more ships in a
little bit wider range, we stillend up, though, having a
problem of having the ability tomaintain them, to repair them
and also to man them.
We're a little behind on thepeople side, are we not right
(49:02):
now, when it comes tooperational readiness and the
way of ship deployments.
Brent Ramsey (49:18):
Well, yes, during the Biden term, recruiting was
very bad.
It was really a consequence, Ithink, of the political emphasis
of DEI and some of that othernonsense that President Trump is
now turning that stuff around.
It'll be hard to root that out.
So the recruiting numbers are,thankfully for all the services
are up.
But it is true what you justsaid the Navy's been very
shorthanded militarily.
(49:38):
I think two or three years in arow the Navy missed recruiting
goals by thousands.
So we're understaffed.
We're putting ships to sea.
You've been to sea duty, I'vebeen to sea duty.
There's nothing worse thansending a ship to sea with not a
full complement, because numberone ships are dangerous.
(49:59):
It's not like going on acaravan cruise.
That's a fun thing when you goon a Navy ship.
Al Palmer (50:09):
The fun is not part of the equation, okay.
Brent Ramsey (50:12):
It is hard, dangerous work.
As an aviator you know that waybetter than me.
I was in the service Navy butI'm a qualified officer of the
deck.
I can tell you I've been upclose and personal with a Soviet
Yankee for five days chasingthem in the North Atlantic.
Nothing about operating ashipboard is easy or not
(50:37):
potentially dangerous.
So it is absolutely foolishnessto send ships to sea without a
full compliment and it justwears out the crew, makes
everybody more tired than theyshould be, and tired sailors
create accidents and I've seen alot of at sea accidents so I
know what I'm talking about.
(50:57):
So under the best ofcircumstances, navy ships at sea
operating in a lot of time,very extreme I've been.
I've sailed above the arcticcircle where your nose will
freeze off, uh, you know justvery, very arduous conditions.
Saltwater is very corrosive.
It's a constant effort to tryto keep the ship repaired and
(51:21):
functioning and I know I'mpreaching to the choir because
you've got probably more seaduty than I have, but it is true
that we are desperately shortof people.
The admiral in charge of FleetForces Command has publicly
stated the Navy is not meetingits readiness goals.
We're supposed to have theability to quickly ready and
(51:44):
sortie to see 75 ships in anemergency right, 75 ships.
We're supposed to be able toman them up, get them to sea
quickly to respond to somecrisis anywhere in the world.
That's what our Navy is taskedby mission to do.
Admiral Caudill says we can getmaybe 50 ships to sea in that
(52:05):
time frame.
So we're at two-thirds of themetric, and even that, 75 ships.
Like I said, the world is 70%ocean.
There could be a crisis on 70%of the planet, somewhere that we
need to put Navy ships onstation, or even a humanitarian
situation.
There's a typhoon in Asia andwe're going to provide support,
(52:28):
humanitarian support, so we needto get ships over there to help
out with the situation, rescuepeople from the earthquake in
Myanmar, whatever it is.
We don't have the ships.
We don't have the manpower.
So fortunately, with PresidentTrump in charge now, he has said
he's going to rebuild the Navy.
Recruiting numbers are up andthat's good.
(52:49):
If we really can root out thepolitical nonsense from the
military and make a better pitchto the youth of America, maybe
more people will want to join.
But we do need to put anemphasis in the trades.
It's not just college graduatesthat we need for the Navy.
(53:10):
We need people who have thosekind of skills that can, if they
decide not to join the military, they can go into the defense
industry and they can become awelder or electrician or
whatever it is and they can helpbuild the ships that we need.
But those are emphasis that ourcountry should make to rebuild
the industrial base and to beable to build the weapon systems
(53:33):
that we need in order to defendthe country.
Al Palmer (53:37):
Well, let's hope that that's going to happen.
I know that the Commission onDefense Readiness reported that
to the Congress here just lastyear before the election,
talking about how behind we wereboth in the Navy side as well
as the defense industrial base,and that's all going to, I think
(53:58):
, happen because of what thepresident is doing.
I think you're right, fred.
I'm hopeful that that comesabout sooner rather than later,
but your writings on thatcertainly are very influential,
I think, and we're happy to haveyou here with STARS to be able
to talk about that the way wehave today, and I hope our
listeners will actually go toour website and read some more
(54:22):
about what you've written aboutthis.
It's very important work.
You know that we're doing and Ithink we're making some way here
.
But you're right, we've gotsome headwinds ahead of us here,
but thanks to people like you,I think we're making some way
here.
But you're right, we've gotsome headwinds ahead of us here,
but thanks to people like you,I think we're going to do it
thanks al and it's great havingyou with us, sir.
(54:44):
Thanks for all that you do bothfor us, for the calvert crew, uh
, and keeping the fleet uh inmotion.
Uh, hopefully it'll getshipbuilding going again.
And thanks again, brent, forbeing with us.
Brent Ramsey (54:57):
My pleasure.
Al Palmer (54:59):
And our audience will leave Brent's worthy writings
available to you online, alongwith our podcast archive.
There, too, you can look backand see what we had also done
about the book that Calvert didon Don't Give Up the Ship, which
is part of what we're talkingabout today as well.
So, brent, thanks again to ouraudience.
(55:21):
We'll look forward to seeingyou again next week for another
exciting episode of Stars andStripes.
Thanks for watching.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!