U.S. Navy to build $3 Billion Stealth Destroyer

[Doomsday101]

We got stealth water craft...they are called submarines. Much easier to miss than a destroyer.

However even if you wanted a top of the water navy vessel to be stealth...let's do an air craft carrier with stealth fighters on board.

A stealth destroyer just seems silly. An aircraft carrier is a better arsenal IMO and if you want to be truly stealth for cheaper go with the submarine and develop stealth technology to evade sonar.

Just my two coppers.

May want to know more about it before dismissing it.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

May want to know more about it before dismissing it.

May want to more about it before accepting it.

Just saying.

 

[burmafrd]

Military is a necessity. To say otherwise is ignorant.

Look at South Korea. Their military is so weak that they cannot defend themselves against North Korea. The only reason North Korea doesn't declare all out war on South Korea is because the US and other countries would step in.

Iraq was going broke under Saddam Hussein, so what did he do? He invaded a rich country that couldn't defend itself. (Kuwait)

do not know where you do your research but you need to go elsewhere

South Korea has a very strong military.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

do not know where you do your research but you need to go elsewhere

South Korea has a very strong military.

If it is so strong than maybe we should remove all US troops from South Korea and spend that money and man power elsewhere.

 

[The30YardSlant]

Military is a necessity. To say otherwise is ignorant.

Look at South Korea. Their military is so weak that they cannot defend themselves against North Korea. The only reason North Korea doesn't declare all out war on South Korea is because the US and other countries would step in.

Iraq was going broke under Saddam Hussein, so what did he do? He invaded a rich country that couldn't defend itself. (Kuwait)

South Korea has the sixth-largest military force in the world and has very modernized technology and weaponry.

 

[Doomsday101]

May want to more about it before accepting it.

Just saying.

I agree. I would like to know exactly how it fits into what they envision. I have to say over the years those visions have lead to one of the most lethal and effective miliatary this world has even known

 

[vta]

Are we borrowing money from China to build a ship to undermine China?
I wonder what this will do to our Chinese Credit rating.

 

[joseephuss]

I think the idea in itself is great. Can they actually pull it off at a reasonable cost? I think that remains to be seen. Based on a few comments within the embedded AP story, it sounds as if some critics already think the cost has gone too high.

 

[The30YardSlant]

If it is so strong than maybe we should remove all US troops from South Korea and spend that money and man power elsewhere.

People have a very narrow view of our military presence in Korea. Most think we are there to prevent South Korea from being hopelessly overrun, when in reality our presence is to help ward off a large scale conflict. Any Korean conflict would immediately bring China and America into the fray, and suddenly you've got four of the six most powerful forces ont he earth (all with nuclear capabilties) in a scuffle. South Korea would oput up a very good fight in a straight up war between the two, however.

Most people with significant knowledge of the issue will tell you that a Korean conflict would be the quickest and most likely start to WWIII.

 

[joseephuss]

I agree. I would like to know exactly how it fits into what they envision. I have to say over the years those visions have lead to one of the most lethal and effective miliatary this world has even known

And they have accomplished that with both successful and unsuccessful ventures into weapons and technology. Sometimes you learn a lot from the stuff that doesn't work.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

I agree. I would like to know exactly how it fits into what they envision. I have to say over the years those visions have lead to one of the most lethal and effective miliatary this world has even known

I would rather money be given to the troops on the ground or through the drones.

Plus with a project as big as this I can see it being paid for but being delayed or possibly being so riddled with problems that it never sees the light of day even after the contractors were given the money for it.

I would rather have proven products upgraded and handed out to the troops on the ground...or upgrade some of the subs to evade sonar better...hey they are underwater so the stealth part is half there compared to some huge ship floating in the water.

More drones and better...maybe with longer flying time and upgraded weaponry.

I imagine there are planes out there that the government has spent butt loads of money on that never scene the light of day...I could see this type of thing being the same way.

 

[DallasEast]

A rail-gun huh? That'll be perfect in picking off Decepticons climbing up pyramids...

 

[casmith07]

Military is a necessity. To say otherwise is ignorant.

Look at South Korea. Their military is so weak that they cannot defend themselves against North Korea. The only reason North Korea doesn't declare all out war on South Korea is because the US and other countries would step in.

Iraq was going broke under Saddam Hussein, so what did he do? He invaded a rich country that couldn't defend itself. (Kuwait)

It's more of a necessity with some of our enemies/iffy allies starting to construct navies.

This destroyer, if it has a railgun, could also really extend the effective range for attack. One of these could probably take on a fleet by itself from a distance rather than needing to get within striking distance of the enemy to act.

I like it. It's costly, but it could potentially pay dividends in the future.

However, I think the better idea was already expressed above - stealth carriers with stealth bomber deployment capability as well as stealth precision strike drones. Submarines were specifically designed to be stealth, and have surface-to-air capability as well as surface-to-ground capability...so it's kind of weird that they'd be building a stealth destroyer.

UNLESS the primary purpose of the stealth destroyer is for the railgun and the implications of stealth long range attack without potential for counter-fire. That's the main benefit I see from it.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

People have a very narrow view of our military presence in Korea. Most think we are there to prevent South Korea from being hopelessly overrun, when in reality our presence is to help ward off a large scale conflict. Any Korean conflict would immediately bring China and America into the fray, and suddenly you've got four of the six most powerful forces ont he earth (all with nuclear capabilties) in a scuffle. South Korea would oput up a very good fight in a straight up war between the two, however.

Most people with significant knowledge of the issue will tell you that a Korean conflict would be the quickest and most likely start to WWIII.

Psst...I spent a year there...I think I know a little of why we are still there.

I have seen the tank traps (and drove between them) there...I have seen the bridges (and went across them) that were wired with explosives. I have seen maps where we have specific targets marked in North Korea and maps that have specific targets that north korea has targeted in S.Korea.

I have also seen that the camp that is closest to the DMZ is set up to be blocked off and is nothing more than a stumbling block or slow down measure with mostly like death to most of the troopers there.

I have also LIVED in the same barracks and for a short time the same ROOM as some of the Korean Soldiers attached the US army (we called them Katusa's). I have been out in the field and provided first aid and worked with ROK soldiers. They are tough...but you might be shocked that a good number of the Katusa's would rather have North and South Korea united.

Heck I will tell you that there is a significant portion that do not want the US to still be in Korea.
When I was stationed there (89-90) there was talk of the S.Korean gov/military wanting to buy all of the bases the US Army occupied. They were told not only would they have to pay for the land but all structures and upgrades made to the land over the years.

So I know we are there for strategic reasons...just as we are still in other parts of the world. But that does not take away from the idea that they are not strong enough to stand on their own.

 

[03EBZ06]

Military is a necessity. To say otherwise is ignorant.

Look at South Korea. Their military is so weak that they cannot defend themselves against North Korea. The only reason North Korea doesn't declare all out war on South Korea is because the US and other countries would step in.

Iraq was going broke under Saddam Hussein, so what did he do? He invaded a rich country that couldn't defend itself. (Kuwait)

Sam,

South Korea actually has a very good **, they have a very capable air defense with 60+ F-15K, which is equipped with the latest technological upgrades and they are also buy Next Gen Fighters to replace F-15Ks.

Their Army/Navy/Marine Corps are not strong as US but they are capable of defending their country from NK, so they are far from being weak.

If it was just NK vs SK with no other country involvement, SK would annihilate NK.

 

[speedkilz88]

A rail-gun huh? That'll be perfect in picking off Decepticons climbing up pyramids...

Unless the Stealth Destroyer with the rail-gun is a Decepticon, then we really screwed the pooch.

 

[DallasEast]

Unless the Stealth Destroyer with the rail-gun is a Decepticon, then we really screwed the pooch.

Good point.

 

[casmith07]

If it was just NK vs SK with no other country involvement, SK would annihilate NK.

It wouldn't even be close. It would be a slaughter.

 

[DallasEast]

Sam,

South Korea actually has a very good **, they have a very capable air defense with 60+ F-15K, which is equipped with the latest technological upgrades and they are also buy Next Gen Fighters to replace F-15Ks.

Their Army/Navy/Marine Corps are not strong as US but they are capable of defending their country from NK, so they are far from being weak.

If it was just NK vs SK with no other country involvement, SK would annihilate NK.

I would say that's the main reason why North Korea is fanatically pro-nuclear.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

It wouldn't even be close. It would be a slaughter.

Just like we slaughtered and made an easy victory in Viet Nam and in Korea during our conflict?

Technology does not always equate to being the be all end all winner in a military engagement.

If that were the case we would not left Viet Nam...We would not still have people standing at the DMZ and we would have destroyed every muslim terrorist in Afghanistan even though they do not have any where near the technology we had or have.

Just something to consider when talking about one side killing the other and it would not be close.