Skip to main content

View Diary: Paul Ryan doesn't understand 'bayonets' (261 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  In fact, Navy itself may be obsolete (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    zesty grapher

    US global military dominance rests on the 11 carrier fleets. They are extremely expensive. A single and far cheaper nuclear weapon could wreck such a fleet. And it may not be possible  to trace the point of origin for such a weapon if it is detonated from, say,  10 miles away. Simply look at how vulnerable the USS Cole was to conventional explosives on a tiny motorboat.

    Due to the expense inherent in ship-building, all navies are quickly obsolete. You just cant build new ones fast enough to keep up with cheaper offensive weapons. This goes all the way back to Salamis where the Greeks used cheap little ships to destroy the navy of the great Persian Emperor. Pearl Harbor is a more recent example.

    Yes, we do need to maintain  a navy to guard sea lanes  from the likes of the Somali pirates or to interdict illict shipments, but in an actual combat situations, the more expensive fleets usually go down first.

    If my soldiers were to begin to think, not one would remain in the ranks. -Frederick the Great

    by Valatius on Tue Oct 23, 2012 at 10:16:05 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site