<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>gdp's Comments</title>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<link>https://www.intensedebate.com/users/806142</link>
		<description>Comments by Billyray72</description>
<item>
<title>DoD Buzz : Too Few CG Cutters For Demands</title>
<link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/02/17/too-few-cg-cutters-for-demands/#IDComment58642266</link>
<description>I am a Coast Guard Veteran. If there is anybody that should know about this deepwater program. It has been going since the Coast Guard has been in service and that is being placed on the back burner. The other services have one person that the Coast Guard needs to make this deepwater project, that person is the Secretary of the Coast Guard. We need to have a Secretary that can provide and make this Deepwater project come into reality. The National Security Cutter only represents one tenth of the deepwater project. The 110 to 123 extention really set this project on a deep slop that the USCG will not recover. And the American taxpayers will find more debt on the national debt for generations to come.Now about ships in mothballs, yes it could work, but it will cost more to replace warn out parts that today ships will cost less.  </description>
<pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 12:34:58 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/02/17/too-few-cg-cutters-for-demands/#IDComment58642266</guid>
</item>	</channel>
</rss>