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

[casmith07]

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.

Well, taking into consideration North Korea's severe logistical constraints including not only ammunition and fuel but simple food and field rations, it would be extremely difficult for them to sustain a full spectrum operation for any longer than 72-hours.

I think your viewpoint also takes into consideration the fact (or opinion -- you've been to Korea before and I have not, so correct me if I'm wrong) that SK would operate in accordance with the Geneva Convention and all other International Laws of War, and would not employ a scorched earth or total warfare strategy. You would be more well-versed on this for me.

If we really wanted to, we could easily have totally wiped out the threat in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq.

So I'm assuming you're talking on following the rules, but I was pointing more toward the scorekeeping of logistics as well.

Now why don't you go tie a tourniquet or somethin', Doc?

 

[casmith07]

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

Nuclear weapons, though they may never be employed, are a way for a little guy to get a seat at the big kids' table.

 

[DallasEast]

Nuclear weapons, though they may never be employed, are a way for a little guy to get a seat at the big kids' table.

They also serve as the little guy's deterrent from the big guy's aggression.

 

[speedkilz88]

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.

Don't you think if the U.S. had only taken the fight to the North in both situations and bombed the hell out of their major cities and military installations that both those wars would have ended rather quickly? Just sayin.:

 

[Doomsday101]

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.

I agree to an extent I also think you stay on the cutting edge not standing still or thinking well this is enough. I have no clue as to how this will work or how they envision it but they also developed things like Stealth Bombers and Stealth fighters, I'm sure some did not think these were good ideas or we could spend the money differently. I agree some programs will never see the light of day but we did not get to the worlds largest and stronger power by standing still in our development

 

[kmp77]

So what happens when a single diesel sub sneaks up on it and sinks it with a single torpedo? Way too much to spend on a single ship.

 

[03EBZ06]

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.

US was fighting with one arm tied behind their back by the politicians and we followed Geneva Convention rules of engagement, whereas Viet Nam did whatever means necessary to win the war, it was not a fair fight, same goes for Afghanistan and Iraq. If US vs any one country without any internal or external involvement, I have no doubt US will beat any country.

Heck even the best NFL team can't beat a College team if they are restricted from what they are capable of.

 

[Lonestar94]

What a waste.

Really??

 

[The30YardSlant]

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.

North Korea's problem is that they don't have the resources to sustain a long-term military campaign on their own. They are fanatical and have a very large force, but they have SEVERE logistical constraints.

 

[Future]

It always fascinates me how many new and creative ways we continue to find to blow **** up.

:laugh2: seriously

 

[DallasEast]

(too late)

Preemptive reminder: No political discussion.

 

[Doomsday101]

So what happens when a single diesel sub sneaks up on it and sinks it with a single torpedo? Way too much to spend on a single ship.

I doubt a sub could get that close without todays ships picking it up and blowing it out of the water.

 

[TheSport78]

(too late)

Preemptive reminder: No political discussion.

Sorry about that. The passion gets the best of me lol

 

[Doomsday101]

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.

We won the battles it was politics that lost it. I would also add in Vet. and Korea we followed certain rules of engagement they did not. If it was up to me we would not have followed those rules either.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

US was fighting with one arm tied behind their back by the politicians and we followed Geneva Convention rules of engagement, whereas Viet Nam did whatever means necessary to win the war, it was not a fair fight, same goes for Afghanistan and Iraq. If US vs any one country without any internal or external involvement, I have no doubt US will beat any country.

Not a fair fight?

We were vastly technically superior in every shape in viet nam, korea and afghanistan.

That was part of the main part I was talking about. Just because someone is vastly superior in technology does not mean an automatic win and be decision that would be coined not even close.

As far as rules. That is what should separate us from some of our perceived enemies...that what separates humans from monsters. We should be above their actions...if we do the atrocities that we claim they do and justify attacking them for..then we are no better than them if we sink to their level.

We signed up for the rules, we use them to go after people...if we don't want to play by the rules than we should just abandon them all together and not persecute or use that to justify going to war with others.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

I doubt a sub could get that close without todays ships picking it up and blowing it out of the water.

They could if it was a...wait for it..."Stealth" sub. :laugh2:

 

[silverbear]

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.

But they look so cool, man... I want one...

 

[Doomsday101]

Not a fair fight?

We were vastly technically superior in every shape in viet nam, korea and afghanistan.

That was part of the main part I was talking about. Just because someone is vastly superior in technology does not mean an automatic win and be decision that would be coined not even close.

As far as rules. That is what should separate us from some of our perceived enemies...that what separates humans from monsters. We should be above their actions...if we do the atrocities that we claim they do and justify attacking them for..then we are no better than them if we sink to their level.

We signed up for the rules, we use them to go after people...if we don't want to play by the rules than we should just abandon them all together and not persecute or use that to justify going to war with others.

It is not a game, if the enemy chooses not to follow the rules of engagement we should not be obligated to give them any free pass. In terms of battles we won the battle only to give the ground right back up due to politics not because the enemy defeated us.

WWII when we saw how the Japanese conducted themselves we became very harsh in our treatment of them and few men there regret it. If my enemy shows me no mercy the do not deserve mercy. That does not make us monsters

 

[silverbear]

Ding Ding Ding.

As I noted in my post...if you are going to make a big above the water vessel stealth...make it a Air craft carrier and you could make some drones stealth and load the carrier with drones along with the other air craft.

Hell I am sure you could probably even find a way to incorporate a rail gun on an air craft carrier.

Oh, now I get it-- you've got a problem with defense contractors making an honest million or ten...

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

But they look so cool, man... I want one...

Looks silly.

Looks like a submarine base with some kind of modern architecture house on top of it. :laugh2:


Screw a stealth Destroyer anyways...I want to come in like oddball from Kelley's heroes or Col Kilgore in Apoc Now...sounds blaring, playing Flight of the Valkrie so loud that it scares people....then start tearing butt and lighting up the country side. :laugh2: