Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

patphil

(9,185 posts)
5. A battleship is incredibly vulnerable to attack, as are all surface ships.
Thu Apr 30, 2026, 12:27 PM
Apr 30

Trump's new battleship will be a slow (30-35 knots) lumbering beast that would represent an easy kill for any sophisticated military like Russia, or China, and even a forward thinking country with a much smaller military.
Aircraft carriers are not much better.
We look good when we're fighting a war against small, relatively primitive military forces, but if Iran's missile program was a little bit further along, that may have been able to launch deadly attacks against any of our surface ships in the region.
It's becoming evident that the world of warfare has transformed over the past decade into something that makes any and all stationary, or slow moving, targets vulnerable. Weapons that cost in the hundreds of thousands of dollars can destroy a billion dollar target; overwhelming it's defenses by sending large numbers of drones or missiles at once.
Land targets fare no better.
Russia has learned in Ukraine that using decades old technology against an adversary can be beaten back by these new technologies.
We are now seeing the same thing with Iran.
The question I have is, what good would it be to have a battleship named after Trump? It would still be a loser, just like it's namesake.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The U.S. Military Was Los...»Reply #5