The U.S.S. Diplomatic...
Irony of ironies...
The last name I would associate with a sleek, nimble, deadly attack submarine is Jimmy Carter. Maybe this attack sub will cruise into enemy waters waving a smiley-face flag and shoot flowers and newly constructed houses onto the shore...
Don't get me wrong, I think what Jimmy Carter has done with his life is very admirable and has done much to pay for the current administration's sins. But naming an attack submarine after one of the world's most well-known pacifists...that's just bass-ackwards.
posted by Aaron Bynum at 22:04
4 Comments:
Yeah, nice blog, I like it.
So what’s wrong with naming a battleship the USS Idaho then, or the USS Ben Franklin, or even the USS Iowa, I don’t recall Iowa being a battle proven state (Now you could get away with calling it a 'Battle Ground State', but that’s a little different).
Besides isn’t the point or our arsenal to be a deterrence not an aggressor force?
Keep rockin on...
9:01 AM
Chris,
Iowa actually had the highest percentage, state-wide, of any state in the Civil War. It is very much a battle-proven state.
The original point of our military force was to be a deterrent force, but now I'm not so sure. We've gone from "Walk softly and carry a big stick" to "Stomp around like a spoiled child and throw things."
10:47 AM
Ok so how about these ones then?
1. USS California
2. USS Austin
3. USS Bobo
4. Or even get this the USS Bob Hope.
My point is this; the naming convention for US Submarines is not intended to be threatening.
"Traditionally, United States submarines have been named after fish and other marine creatures. One exception was the Navy's first submarine HOLLAND which was named after its inventor, John Philip Holland. Today, ballistic missile submarines are named for famous American patriots, with the newest class, the OHIO class, named after states. The LOS ANGELES class of attack submarines are named for United States cities."
here is a paper explaining the naming convention of US submarines.
11:09 AM
Good info. Thanks, Serephin. And don't worry, I'll keep posting stuff.
chris,
My point wasn't that they shouldn't name a submarine after President Carter, it's that it is a very ironic thing to do - maybe not from the viewpoint of his Navy career, but definitely from the viewpoint of his current doings. Thanks for keeping me on my toes...
9:08 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home