Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Thread Tools Display Modes
derrida derrida is offline
derrida's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2003
Old Feb 5th, 2008, 11:47 PM        Is the modern surface navy obsolete?
Reading this I'm glad I'm a sand squid.

What happened in Millennium Challenge is that the Navy brass picked a prickly retired USMC vet named Paul van Ripen to play the Iranian commander facing a naval incursion--and van Riper, with nothing but small speedboats, civilian prop planes, and low-tech surface-to-surface missiles, managed to sink two-thirds of the US force by buzzing them with annoying but not openly hostile civilian craft, then attacking simultaneously with everything he had.
I made two important points in that column. The first is that war's entering a new phase where blurring the line between civilian and military isn't just an accident or cheating but crucial to any irregular force facing first-world attackers. It's how they win.

My second point, the one I got a lot of flak for, was that if we send our old-fashioned carrier battle groups into the Gulf in wartime, they won't come out. They'll make excellent dive sites after all the coral and urchins and other sea critters have colonized them--the Gulf is nice and shallow, so our ships will be resting in really prime diving depth--but they won't come out alive.
Well, durned if the Iranians showed they'd learned from van Riper even if the US Navy refused to. To celebrate the new year, the neocons decided to send another battle group into the Persian Gulf. And guess how the Iranians reacted. Yup: they sent a bunch of small "civilian" speedboats to harass the frigate screen, zipping and zooming in the US Navy's wakes. Waterskiing for all I know, just having a great old time trying to provoke the USN's close-in defense systems into a massacre that they could play for the home audience, tapping into that gigantic Shia lust for martyrdom.
Reply With Quote
McClain McClain is offline
Fuck Yeah
McClain's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Hoosier
Old Feb 11th, 2009, 10:13 AM       
I worked for the U.S. Third Fleet when I was in the Navy. We ran these types of exercises constantly with battlegroups. To say that the opposition "sank" two-thirds of the US force is a bit of a stretch. It's training.

colloq. And because no one is using real ammunition or explosives, it's akin to me and you playing Star Wars and me saying, "I just cut off your arm!" and you'd likely respond with a "nuh uh! I dodged it and lopped off your head. You're dead!" 'Cept in this situation they have expensive computing equipment, thousands of Sailors, and an impressive Command Information Center buzzing with rendered excitement.

U.S. Navy ships don't have a soft underbelly, or a blind spot for "close-in" defense systems. Why not? Because even the smallest ships will have at least six .50 cal's on deck. Not to mention RPG, M16s, smallarms, etc.

And to top it all off, you're expecting objective American military information from The Exile?

Last edited by Chojin : Jan 1st, 2000 at 12:01 AM.
Reply With Quote
Evil Robot Evil Robot is offline
Evil Robot's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Non-trendy NYC enclave
Old Feb 11th, 2009, 03:58 PM       
The US Navy invented the LRADS, or "puke ray". No other navy has a "puke ray".
Reply With Quote
Zhukov Zhukov is offline
Supa Soviet Missil Mastar
Zhukov's Avatar
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tasmania
Old Feb 12th, 2009, 09:52 AM       
The way I always saw it was that even if a small group of rubber boats can take out a great hulking cruiser or whatever (really not down with what the boats are called now that WWII is over) countries still need a fleet of sizeable ships to defend their nuclear submarines in the open seas.

Because nuclear submarines can shoot MRBMs.

Something along those lines, at least.
Reply With Quote
El Blanco El Blanco is offline
El Blanco's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New York, NY
Old Feb 12th, 2009, 10:46 AM       
moving large forces by sea is 100x easier and more efficient than by air. So, if you want to be able to put troops and equipment in a foreign land, you need a modern surface navy.
according to my mongoose, anyway.
Reply With Quote
kahljorn kahljorn is offline
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NO
Old Feb 12th, 2009, 01:53 PM       
Doesn't this only pertain to wars with people who use guerrilla tactics anyway? That's like saying our ground troops are obsolete because of vietnam or something ;\
Reply With Quote
MetalMilitia MetalMilitia is offline
Hitler's Canoe!
MetalMilitia's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Old Feb 12th, 2009, 02:03 PM       
The thing is, I can't imagine there will be any other type of war in the foreseeable future.

If the US did go to war with -say- China my guess is missile and bomber technology is such these days that traditional battleship-type vessels would be destroyed within 5 minutes of being launched.
Originally Posted by bigtimecow View Post
Reply With Quote
Tadao Tadao is offline
Tadao's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2002
Old Feb 12th, 2009, 03:38 PM       
Don't know, maybe we have ways of hiding from radar and satellite.
Reply With Quote
Dimnos Dimnos is offline
LOVES the tubal ligation!
Dimnos's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Baseball Town, TX
Old Feb 13th, 2009, 04:20 PM       
Puke Ray for the win!
Originally Posted by Esuohlim View Post
Exactly. Life's too short to not be ejaculating as often as possible
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:59 PM.

© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.