|
|
Post by ayatollah on Sept 26, 2024 23:32:36 GMT
Wouldn't be so sure about what? What are you talking about? I'm talking about defending the country, as in people like you and I, not some island or Ukraine. Yes, you're right the media presents it like it's inevitable (sadly it might be) but again that's in the interest of our elite class and not the country. What I'm talking about is what you're talking about. It should have been self-evident. Perhaps you should read it again. However, that being said, if no one fights them over there, the only option may be to fight them here. Don't get me wrong. I enjoyed "Red Dawn" as much as the next person, but it was fiction. Anyone who wants to do that is either insane or naive. No country on earth is going to invade the mainland US. |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Sept 26, 2024 23:36:00 GMT
Given that Destroyers and Cruises are essentially the same size and their armaments have heavy overlap, the difference between the two is increasingly semantic. You've got a point there. It's no longer as easy to distinguish the two types. Cruisers have remained about the same size that they were seventy years ago, but destroyers have gradually gotten a lot bigger. If it were up to me, I'd keep destroyers as small and disposable as possible, and thus build more of them. When the thing costs a billion plus dollars it's hard to think of it as a "tin can" anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Sept 26, 2024 23:36:47 GMT
What I'm talking about is what you're talking about. It should have been self-evident. Perhaps you should read it again. However, that being said, if no one fights them over there, the only option may be to fight them here. Don't get me wrong. I enjoyed "Red Dawn" as much as the next person, but it was fiction. Anyone who wants to do that is either insane or naive. No country on earth is going to invade the mainland US. We'll put that on your tombstone, Florida Man. ![[grin]](http://storage.proboards.com/6870873/images/CBubFSUbXfyoLMZUjeBb.gif) |
|
|
|
Post by cts1 on Sept 26, 2024 23:42:33 GMT
Given that Destroyers and Cruises are essentially the same size and their armaments have heavy overlap, the difference between the two is increasingly semantic. You've got a point there. It's no longer as easy to distinguish the two types. Cruisers have remained about the same size that they were seventy years ago, but destroyers have gradually gotten a lot bigger. If it were up to me, I'd keep destroyers as small and disposable as possible, and thus build more of them. When the thing costs a billion plus dollars it's hard to think of it as a "tin can" anymore. You have described a Frigate. |
|
|
|
Post by OfUnknownOrigins on Sept 26, 2024 23:44:23 GMT
Now USS Leyte Gulf has been decommissioned. Navy decommissions cruiser Leyte Gulf after nearly 40 years of serviceIt's okay. We've still got nine more, I think. China has none. Let me rephrase that. China has no cruisers......on paper. 😁 And it doesn't matter anyway. I'll tell you what matters. What matters is calling some disgusting purple-haired freak by the correct pronoun so that he/she/it/they/them doesn't get low self-esteem. THAT'S what really matters! 😉 What are we replacing it with? |
|
|
|
Post by ayatollah on Sept 26, 2024 23:45:40 GMT
No country on earth is going to invade the mainland US. We'll put that on your tombstone, Florida Man. The logistics of getting a million man force across an ocean to the US without being bombed to bits or sunk aren't realistic. We will never fight "them" here. So therefore the scenario of fighting "them" there so we don't have to do it here is bullshit. Maybe if China could get Mexico into a military alliance and station a large army there? That's about the only way it could happen. |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Sept 26, 2024 23:47:52 GMT
Now USS Leyte Gulf has been decommissioned. Navy decommissions cruiser Leyte Gulf after nearly 40 years of serviceIt's okay. We've still got nine more, I think. China has none. Let me rephrase that. China has no cruisers......on paper. 😁 And it doesn't matter anyway. I'll tell you what matters. What matters is calling some disgusting purple-haired freak by the correct pronoun so that he/she/it/they/them doesn't get low self-esteem. THAT'S what really matters! 😉 What are we replacing it with? As far as I can tell, we are replacing them with.......nothing. EDIT -- I say them because all of the Ticonderoga class are scheduled for decommissioning between now and 2027. |
|
|
|
Post by ayatollah on Sept 26, 2024 23:55:15 GMT
What are we replacing it with? As far as I can tell, we are replacing them with.......nothing. Good, but sadly thats probably due to expensive US shipbuilding rather than sane foreign policy. |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Sept 26, 2024 23:59:40 GMT
As far as I can tell, we are replacing them with.......nothing. Good, but sadly thats probably due to expensive US shipbuilding rather than sane foreign policy. These warships are capable of being used offensively, in distant waters, taking the fight to the enemy, and that's how the US Navy prefers it if I'm not mistaken. When you keep them at home for defense, you're getting less use out of them, and you're letting the enemy get with striking range of the continent. Just saying. Not trying to be a killjoy, but that's just how it is. |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Sept 27, 2024 0:08:30 GMT
You've got a point there. It's no longer as easy to distinguish the two types. Cruisers have remained about the same size that they were seventy years ago, but destroyers have gradually gotten a lot bigger. If it were up to me, I'd keep destroyers as small and disposable as possible, and thus build more of them. When the thing costs a billion plus dollars it's hard to think of it as a "tin can" anymore. You have described a Frigate. I don't like those friggin' frigates. 😠 And it's another ship type to which the definition is subjective. In one navy it might be called a destroyer, and in someone else's navy it's classified as a frigate. Same ship, the only difference is the nomenclature. |
|
|
|
Post by ayatollah on Sept 27, 2024 0:08:40 GMT
Good, but sadly thats probably due to expensive US shipbuilding rather than sane foreign policy. These warships are capable of being used offensively, in distant waters, taking the fight to the enemy, and that's how the US Navy prefers it if I'm not mistaken. When you keep them at home for defense, you're getting less use out of them, and you're letting the enemy get with striking range of the continent. Just saying. Not trying to be a killjoy, but that's just how it is. Who is this enemy? Why are they our enemy? |
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Sept 27, 2024 0:12:02 GMT
These warships are capable of being used offensively, in distant waters, taking the fight to the enemy, and that's how the US Navy prefers it if I'm not mistaken. When you keep them at home for defense, you're getting less use out of them, and you're letting the enemy get with striking range of the continent. Just saying. Not trying to be a killjoy, but that's just how it is. Who is this enemy? Why are they our enemy? Those are good questions. Another one is why are we risking everything for Ukraine, a country that isn't worth it? |
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Sept 27, 2024 0:13:26 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by ayatollah on Sept 27, 2024 0:15:15 GMT
Who is this enemy? Why are they our enemy? Those are good questions. Another one is why are we risking everything for Ukraine, a country that isn't worth it? Our leaders want total global hegemony. Ukraine being in NATO means the US can put large forces on Russia's border, threatening it. |
|
|
|
Post by MyFriendDontBeAPaedo on Sept 27, 2024 6:33:34 GMT
Here is a list of ships announced to under construction. Several DDGs and SSNs and 3 CVNs (including The Doris Miller CVN 81). No cruisers. Maybe they are being phased out in favor of destroyers. Also, once a warship is mothballed, it's finished. link |
|
![[shades]](http://storage.proboards.com/6870873/images/xuHnLEnLTSNptewaqJsQ.gif)
