And it’s not just countries but people. And this is even more true if the person is a woman or there is a woman leading a particular country.
Poor POTUS is a product of his bad upbringing and society at the time. His father drilled into him that wealth, power, and fame are the only true markers of a person’s (or country’s) worth or success. Add in a dash of old school discrimination and you’ve got a consistently antiquated anti-social behavior towards individuals, groups, or countries.
It’s the same way he’s a fan of coal, battleships, combat sports, and anything gold, but thinks healthy food, exercise, windmills, and men raising children are evil. He’s the last gasp embodiment of a mindset and way of thinking that truly needs to fade away.
His Twitter is insufferable. I think he actually has lost his mind. I miss when he was just applying about the USMM instead of doing everything he can to please the current admin.
The sad thing is, I don’t think the concept of a modern battleship is necessarily a bad one if you design it to fulfill a useful purpose. If you reuse the energy distribution tech developed for the Zumwalts and load up a capital ship with directed-energy and hard-kill air and missile defense systems, a ton of VLS cells and some direct-fire artillery (the 5” Mk 4 has a 20nm range and is also effective against drones), I can see it playing a very valid role as part of a carrier strike group or leading an independent surface action group. Distributed firepower among multiple platforms may still be the more optimal solution, but I could see the concept working.
But that’s not what they’re showing here. It’s triple the ship compared to an Arleigh Burke with perhaps half again more useful firepower if you count the CPS launchers. The railgun is at least as far off as the ship itself and shouldn’t be counted on. The offensive nukes will be far more trouble than they’re worth and a complete waste of space, let alone money.
I’d love to see us take another stab at big guns; we had fully automatic 8” naval rifles on the 1940s vintage Des Moines class cruisers that were even effective against aircraft. Forget “smart” shells, just make a good-quality gun with good stabilization and plotting computers firing “dumb” projectiles and accept that you’re not going to use it to shoot out individual windows. You can put a rocket motor in the back for extra range if you want, but leave the GPS and laser seekers etc out of it.
The otherwise unremarkable vessel features several sets of containerized Vertical Launch Cells, numbering at least 48, split into 3 rows of 16 with what appears to 4 cells per container with each row 4 containers wide. The vessel in question also is fitted with a Type-1130 Close in Weapons system and at least 3 decoy launchers (presumably six when accounting for the possibility of mountings facing the opposite direction) towards the bow.
Unremarkable vessel? Bristling with fire control radars. Give me a break.
It was said once that sending a frigate or a destroyer was a signal of a government’s interest. Sending a cruiser was an expression of a government’s intent. A cruiser could land a sizeable landing party supplemented by Marines without the expense of an expeditionary force and could defend itself against anything smaller than itself . Aside from the ridiculous concept of calling it a battleship some of the idea has merit.
I expect that it will result in a windfall for drafting offices, paper manufacturers and conceptual drawings .
While I admit that DJT does trigger me, in this case it’s the first two terms on your list.
I say that from the perspective of 28 years in the USN, SWO, with experience on surface ships from frigates to destroyers, to cruisers and the USS IOWA for several brief periods.
A sad day indeed. That was just prior to my operations and weapons training in the RN as Acting Sub-lieutenant (alongside A/SLT The Prince of Wales - now Admiral of the Fleet - another good story or two).
I loved the experience and the naval history everywhere, but had to feel sorry for the poor state of RN wages and conditions. I was paid far more than my RN compatriots - and drank and partied accordingly. We spent time at sea in a few frigates and a submarine and things were very professional and there seemed a far more liberal attitude to alcohol at sea, which I commend.
The Kiwis kept the tradition going a bit longer but we Aussies never issued rum, beer being the norm. We’ve become wowsers since then and breathalyse sailors returning onboard - Ye Gods!
As for battleships, it’s good to see England preserves an early battleship as a major attraction - HMS Victory - and in not such good nick, Mary Rose. So don’t get hung up on the term ‘battleship’. It simply meant and will again mean a primary ship capable of heavy battle. A Trump card/ship if you will.
- Never Submit. No Surrender!
