From the “see, it isn’t just me” files:
Stealth is one way to keep from getting hit, and the United States leads the way in the development of stealthy destroyers. But stealth defeats the purpose of a FONOP (Freedom of Navigation Operation), which is to be seen. An old-fashioned battleship is a ship to be seen—and in a big way. But there’s no need for the Navy to build an old-fashioned battleship in the twenty-first century when it can build a new-fashioned battleship instead.
A contemporary battleship would combine advanced armor materials with automated damage control to produce a ship that is virtually unsinkable. Its offensive armaments might be mission-specific, but its key attribute would be survivability. It would be a ship that could be put in harm’s way in the reasonable expectation of coming home in one piece.
This “battleship of the future” could solve the challenge posed by China’s emerging anti-access / area denial (A2/AD) strategy for excluding the United States from the western Pacific.
I think we made a bit of a mistake by disposing of the battleship – and, in a real sense, also disposing of what was once called a “heavy cruiser”.
It is completely understandable why we went with a carrier Navy – carriers won the naval war of World War Two. Well, carriers and submarines (little noticed in the American mind is how our submarines successfully carried out the massacre of sea-borne trade in the Pacific that the Germans failed to do in the Atlantic). Battleships in WWII were only really useful for shore bombardment and while the Marines still grumble about the Navy not having a solid short-bombardment weapon, it was decided that the Navy money we spend will be spent on carriers and their attendant ships and equipment. And, to be sure, this is a wise investment – and, in fact, I think we should have 15 active carrier battle groups rather than the 10 or so we have now. But I also think we need very big, massively armed and very survivable ships in addition to carriers. We need battleships.
A modern battleship will not be a mere duplicate of the Iowa class ships – the last battleships we built. In dimensions, they might be similar, or even larger – but I doubt we’ll need 12 inches of armor plate given modern materials. Nor would we need 16 inch guns; eventually we’ll have a railgun or something similar, but meanwhile advances in technology probably would allow us to have an 8 or 10 inch gun and be able to simply clobber whatever needed clobbering with guns. But the main armament of such a ship would be missiles. Anti-ship missiles. Anti-air missiles. Anti-sub missiles. Lots and lots of them. It should be nuclear powered. Capable of well more than 35 knots speed. It should be built with a maximum of automation to keep crew numbers as low as possible. And it should be able to take a punch as well as throw one.
A ship like that, added to a carrier battle group or operating as a battleship force would be a distinct deterrent to anyone wanting to challenge us on the seas. Short of a suicidal nuclear attack, sinking such a force would require so much effort as to be not worth the cost. The bottom line for me is that the United States Navy is the first and last line of defense of the United States. All the other armed forces are important, but only the Navy secures us against invasion and ensures our ability to project power around the globe. A US fleet cruising off the Chinese coast is something to give even the most aggressive pause…and as long as our fleet is supreme, no one really dares engage in cross-ocean military actions.
Let’s build some battleships.
It probably doesn’t surprise you that I’m on the same page — exactly the same page. Although I think the Iowa Class was one of, if not THE most awesome weapons systems ever devised, there’s no reason we can’t build a better battleship, given the exponential advance of technology since the 1940’s. I also agree that a battleship projects power better than any other platform, and that’s going to be an important element of diplomacy and geo-political strategy for the foreseeable future.
I will have to defer to you two gentleman’s expertise in this matter. I support anything that will help our military have the upper hand.
On another matter, this is an interesting article that gives you a good idea of how entrenched a lot of destructive attitudes are:
I view what Liberals have done to destroy the black family as one of the most egregious socio-political actions by a political party in my lifetime. The fact that it was actually a deliberate strategy (The Great Society) rather than an unintended consequence of some feel-good policy makes it even worse. The culture of victimhood has been so ingrained in the black community that it may never be undone by anything short of a massive social upheaval.
I agree. And the group think that younger black kids are coerced into subscribing too, only serves a political agenda at the cost of their own future. It’s criminal.
Too many black people seem to think that they, black people, are the only people who have ever experienced slavery or bad treatment. Imagine what the world would be like if every single white person loathed every single Japanese person because of the treatment of white prisoners by the Japanese in WW II.
Unfortunately, history is rife with examples of one group of people badly mistreating other groups of people. The only way for civilization to advance is to move on past it once it is ended.
I think that, just as Leftism appeals to the miserable, the hateful, the resentful and the bitter, the attitude of the black minister in this article shows that there are some people irresistibly drawn to the negative because it resonates with their souls. I have come to think of cause and effect as being the reverse of what I used to think. I used to think that people exposed to hatred and negativity became hateful and negative, and I now think that people receptive to hate and negativity, people with those characteristics defining their being, gravitate to and seek out—–and if necessary, invent—-hate and negativity to validate the ugliness in their hearts and souls.
I have quoted a line from a TV show to many people, and think of it often, because it makes so much sense: “Only a fool trips over what is behind him”.
When I hear the venom spewed by white-hating black people I find that I simply view these people as morally and spiritually inferior, because I believe they have chosen the path of hatred and vitriol because it resonates with their core beings, with their souls.
And it’s not just black people, or race-based. The other day I bought a magazine in one of those organic food type markets because it had an article I thought a friend might like. This is a magazine called “Spirituality and Health” Nice title, right? Sounds all lovey-dovey, kumbaya, right? Yet it contains a letter, chosen by the “spiritual” editors, from a woman in Pennsylvania explaining that anyone who does not agree with her spewing of hate, venom, vitriol and lies—-that is, anyone who voted for Trump—-cannot be either spiritual or wise. This woman, and the editor, are both oblivious to the glaring fact that no one with any degree of spirituality or wisdom would choose to have a mind so occupied with so much hatred and spite. The hypocrisy leapt off the page, yet no doubt these petty, small-minded, judgmental people who have made the choice to follow the path of hatred and resentment are quite proud of themselves for publishing their belief that their emotional and spiritual deficiencies have placed them upon the Higher Moral Ground.
Let me be the first to confirm Trump’s assertion –
Chuck Todd IS A POS, and Maxine Waters IS LOW IQ
I thought these facts were rather obvious
Or, back to the theme that I have only recently come to explore more thoroughly, they have chosen to believe in ideas based on hate because this is where they are most comfortable. They gravitate toward negativity that repels most people, because it echoes what is in their souls.
Maxine’s obsession with trumpeting the ugliness of her soul has merely spotlighted her lack of intelligence. As for Todd, he doesn’t even have the excuse of stupidity. He just likes being vicious because it makes him feel good. It’s a circle—-he is consumed by hate, he expresses it, that makes him feel good and the hate grows so he expresses more of it. He is dependent on his hate because it has come to be such a huge part of who he is, he would be lost and frightened without it.
Completely agree with you on Todd. He is as partisan, and as dishonestly vicious as any of them. Todd has lowered the bar of journalism all by himself.
Though I don’t agree with every scenario listed in this article, it does give an interesting overview of what we could anticipate in a US civil war.
I can especially relate to this part:
As Schlichter goes on to say, the reverse of the part in bold is not true. There are not just millions (I think it’s more like tens of millions) of Americans who would fight back, there are millions of old farts like me who are not particularly concerned with surviving, only taking as many Fascists with me as possible (and I think the opposition is more Fascist than Communist at this point). As I said in a previous thread, part of me wishes the Left would go ahead and start something that they have no means or hope of finishing. It’s probably the only way we’re ever going to get rid of them.
I can certainly understand where a part of you wishes the left would “start something” to force this front and center, as do a good many other conservative minded people. However, other than some of the puppets who play to the tune of the left’s fiddle, I believe those higher up the chain on the left are working diligently to dismantle or distort the Constitution in ways that do NOT trigger the type of response you mentioned. The approach they take is like a child picking at a scab, where it bleeds slowly and doesn’t elicit the same kind of response one would get if the child had a major cut with blood profusely pouring out. With constant picking at our freedoms and rights, but not enough to provoke the action you mention, I wonder if there would be a big enough spark somewhere along the drawn our process of undermining US freedoms and rights, where an all out effort to put down the left would ever get underway. I also wonder if this is a planned strategy of our communist infiltrators, to push the US to a weakened position, less able or unable to defend ourselves & allies. It is after all, a communist approach to win wars without ever having to fire a single shot.
” I also wonder if this is a planned strategy of our communist infiltrators, to push the US to a weakened position, less able or unable to defend ourselves & allies.”
No doubt about it. The Left is very very patient, and have been nibbling away at support for the Constitution for decades now. They did it in the 30s under FDR when they got the Constitution undermined by pushing through the allegedly temporary Social Security bill, and they have been building on that ever since. They have been working at it by taking over our educational system, so students aren’t even taught about the founding of the country, and if they are taught anything it is that Columbus was a vicious genocidal maniac who went sailing across the ocean blue looking for innocent and morally perfect indigenous peoples to massacre and that the nation itself is morally bankrupt because some of its founders once owned slaves.
Not all Americans are profoundly stupid, no matter how it looks, because they react to what they are told, and what they are told consists of lies, distortions and emotional manipulation. They succeed because on the Right there is no coherent pushback. The Left is organized, focused and plays the long game. The Right is incoherent, disorganized and can’t see beyond the next election, and is becoming as tainted by dependence on Identity Politics as the sheeple who make up the voting bloc that enables the masterminds of the Left.
I believe those higher up the chain on the left are working diligently to dismantle or distort the Constitution in ways that do NOT trigger the type of response you mentioned.
That’s my fear as well. The Left is skilled at incrementalism, which is why we find ourselves in our current position without having fired a shot at each other in 153 years. In order to consolidate power, however, the Left will eventually have to disarm, or, more accurately, attempt to disarm Red State America. That’s where I think Schlichter’s piece is accurate. The yearning for freedom is such an integral component of the human spirit in this country that I just don’t see the bad guys ever prevailing.
He touches on a lot of things I have commented on in the past. For example, on the Left there seems to be an assumption that the military would take orders to enter into a war with their own families. I just don’t see that happening. While some officers may be Left-leaning, I think most military volunteers join up because of love of country and that includes defending the Constitution. Every serving member of any military group has family and friends back home and I have always thought that if push comes to shove, and it is a choice between defending home and hearth, as well as the Constitution and the rule of law, vs aiding and abetting an overthrow of the country, not a lot of soldiers, sailors and Marines would take up arms for the Left.
Look at who would be quoted in appeals to either side—-one side would be quoting Jefferson, Madison, Revere, Washington, Nathan Hale, etc and the other side would be quoting Lenin, Marx, Stalin, Castro and Chavez.
I agree, I don’t think the current crop of Lefties is much interested in Communism, per se. Communism requires a certain level of ideological commitment to a specific political model. These people are just vaguely interested in occupying a fantasy Moral High Ground by being symbolically “FOR” currently faddish issues, and I think they are losing ground on all of them. It was easy to be “FOR” something as vague and abstract as “gender fluidity” but a lot harder to be for letting obviously male people who are not making any effort to pass as women join their own wives and daughters in restrooms and locker rooms. It’s a lot easier to be “FOR” letting Bob pretend he is now Bobbi, but a lot less appealing to be told they have to adopt all sorts of bizarre nonsensical invented pseudo-pronouns or be branded as bigots. It’s a lot easier to be “FOR” the abstraction of “choice” for women and a lot harder to support the dismemberment or crushing of babies proved to be capable of feeling pain so their body parts can be sold off, just as it’s a lot easier to be “FOR” the abstract idea that a woman should be allowed to make choices for her own body in the face of the new 3-D sonograms that show facial features of babies in the womb, and show them sucking their thumbs and playing with their toes—in other words, intact human beings with personalities of their own.
I believe that most on the Left who may be adding to the noise, mostly about hating Trump, are quite happy with never being expected to do more than march every now and then for a feel-good “cause” so they can pretend they are relevant. I think the Left is far more accurately represented by a middle-aged woman who needs to carry around a doll to comfort her in the face of a Trump presidency than by a serious committed armed ideologue willing to fight for his or her political beliefs.
And it might take a serious revolution to get the RIght off its fat behind and start playing the propaganda game, taking communication seriously instead of ceding that entire tactic to the far more experienced and skilled Left.
And it might take a serious revolution to get the Right off its fat behind and start playing the propaganda game
I don’t know that Conservatives will ever be good at the propaganda game. It’s just not in our DNA. But something we ARE seeing that I think is a good sign is that a growing number of Conservatives are no long playing the Left’s game. One of Alinsky’s rules for radicals is make your adversary play by his own rules. That tactic has pretty much gone out the window. Now when the Left says, “we will do whatever it takes to defeat you,” a growing number of Conservatives are saying, “we will do whatever it takes to stop you.” So, while being deceitful and dishonest does not come easily to Conservatives, it doesn’t mean that we can’t be mean and nasty. I recall a talk I heard back in the early 70’s by a Marine Recon sniper who had just returned from his 3rd or 4th tour in Vietnam. He carried a notebook that had the following on the cover:
That reflects a growing sentiment among Conservatives, particularly those who have served in the military.
I like his mindset, one I’m sure you have to have doing recon missions.
“Conservatives are saying, “we will do whatever it takes to stop you.””
But even that is playing defense. I want us to go on offense. I like it when the Left is on its back foot, trying to regain ground, and it doesn’t happen often enough.
They aren’t down, not yet, but they are losing some momentum, and it drives me crazy to see the Right lose this opportunity. As cringeworthy as Trump’s tweets often are, he is still the only one taking the battle to the Left.
If I had the power, I know some simple things I would do.
I would buy billboards and a few million bumper stickers to hand out to GOP voters saying simply I DID NOT LEAVE THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY. IT LEFT ME. (Ronald Reagan) We have so many disaffected Dems now, embarrassed by the genital suits and foul-mouthed screeching, not going along with the gender fluidity movement, unhappy about the nastiness of their party. I would simply remind them that this has happened before, and that others have felt the same way, when the party no longer represented them.
By the time the predictable outrage got wound up, I would have talking points sent out to every single media pundit on the Right, so they could stay on message and explain this—explain that it happens, and why it happens, and go on to explain why the GOP is a natural home for people who respect the truth, admire dignity and believe in personal responsibility. That message would emphasize, over and over and over again, that this does not mean agreeing with various issues supported by many conservatives, only that these are state issues and not under the authority of the federal government. “We don’t have to agree on what we want our government to do—we just have to agree to do it in the right way”.
That message would include the idea that if the Dem party wants to keep people who are not radicals, who are not in favor of riots and pooping on police cars and strutting around dressed as human genitals, it will have to rethink its radical direction. We know it won’t, because it can’t reverse direction. Put the party on defense. Force it to argue its case to its base. Force it to come right out and admit its goal is to destroy the Constitution, while pointing out that anything anyone wants government to do can be done within the Constitution, in a way that limits the power of the federal government and moves it closer to the people.
When is the last time you have heard a public voice make that point? And it lies at the heart of the conservative mind.
In the meantime, I would have this Reagan message out there so every driver is going to see it at least a few times, and some, like those who take the same route into work every day past billboards, might see it ten times a week.
My next billboard/bumper sticker message would simply state the 10th Amendment.
I’d fund a postcard mailing to all those registered as Independents— a big glossy postcard with a different message every month or two. And the messages would be succinct and hard-hitting, such as a simple chart showing the millions of dead in various countries in the past 100 years when Leftist governance has taken over—and I’d use the word “LEFT”, not Progressive or Liberal. Left. They want to use the word “Right” all the time—then give them the contrast between Right and Left. I’d do one showing the amazing progress made in 100 years by the United States, say from 1800-1900 or any century prior to FDR and another showing the decline in prosperity in Russia in the century after 1917 when the Left took over. I’d do a postcard mailing with that great quote: “I saw a movie about a country where only the police were armed. It was called Schindler’s List.”
What could be more satisfying that bringing Hollywood in on our side?
I believe that a solid year of this kind of campaign—not snotty, not belligerent, not hostile—would start to have the American Left on defense a lot of the time.
Amazona, I agree it’s long past time that we started playing offense. if you don’t mind, I’d like to share what you wrote with my Congressman. I’ll be seeing him in a couple weeks.
Thanks, Spook. Yes, if you think these ideas might have some traction please do share them. I would volunteer to help organize such efforts, if desired.
I believe a lot of the antipathy to the national GOP, and to many state GOP organizations, is the fact that they are useless. They want our money but don’t show any results. I believe that a lot of conservatives would happily donate to a functional, effective, arm of the GOP that was actually DOING SOMETHING.
Think about it. The Left demonizes the Right so thoroughly that even those who have been supporting the Left and now find it distasteful feel they have no other place to go because they “know” the GOP is pure evil incarnate. Even Mary Matalin, a lifelong and active Republican, had to look for a different place to park her political identity. And what do we do about that? Nothing.
We don’t explain that the Right has nothing to do with the horrible fear-mongering image presented by the Left. We don’t explain that it is really just about choosing the best blueprint for governing the nation, and that within that blueprint there is plenty of room for different opinions on different issues. We just let that false front created by Leftist lies stand there, unchallenged, unexplained and enabling the illusion that bad as it might be the Democrat Party is still better than that creepy, scary, racist Other over there on the Right.
The Right’s message, incoherent and muddled as it has been, has basically been that Conservatism is about freedom. Now the Left are co-opting the concept of freedom, recasting it in Leftist terms. Now it means freedom to choose a gender, freedom from the consequences of unprotected sex, freedom to just stroll into the country unimpeded and then be supported by it, freedom to ignore laws that are inconvenient, etc. And the Right are standing back and watching this incursion into Conservative territory, falsely labeled as it is but still attractive to people who don’t understand it. We are so inarticulate we simply lack the ability to point out that these alleged “freedoms” are really all dependent on oppressing other people—forcing them to accept restrictions on their right to worship as they please, forcing them to accept and use invented pseudo-words to describe invented pseudo-genders, using the force of the government to impose behaviors on others, using the force of the government to confiscate the property of others to support law-breakers, using the force of the government to enable the killing of literally millions of helpless but inconvenient human beings