2007-02-27 05:22:22 · 8 answers · asked by al8675 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
No, the US Navy should have a minimum of 16 Carriers in order to rotate the ships more efficiently and keep up with the maintenance. Our "Off Shore Bombardment" capabilities are not up the standards the US Marine Corps want. They want Battleship type fire not missiles. Our biggest weakness is in transport and supply. Clinton shrunk the Navy by retiring or disposing of the vast majority of Oilers and other resupply ships. Thar's why the US Navy broke it's own rules and dock the USS Cole to refuel. In other words we neither have the Sea Lift or Air List capabilities to move troops and equipment.
2007-02-27 05:57:09 · answer #1 · answered by Joseph D 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I personally dont think we have NEARLY enough. Theodore Roosevelt had the right idea. We need to be able to take on any navy and laugh at it, then blow the crap out of it. So far we only have 276 ships, i think we need at least 1000, whether theyre big or small we need alot of them.
we actually are building smaller ships
but our bigger ships like our new class of carriers which are nuclear powered are also very important. we need 16 of these, so far we also have nuclear subs which can go very long without refueling and would decimate ANY navy.
so were keeping the world at bay.
And actually our navy has 276 ships in active service. thats just the navy, if you visit the Sea Fighter link thats the ship that both the navy and the Coast Guard are looking into. And that thing is the fastest ship in the world, well naval ship any way. It has cruise missile as well as other capabilities.
We have 3 types of SMALLER ships: Cruisers, Destroyers, and Frigates.
*Battleships have been decomissioned, aircraft carriers have taken their place. Another thing is that they cost so much and require alot of maintenance.
our new CVN carriers are going to have a displacement of 120,000 tons (the most in the world).
The new carriers are going to be the most technologically advanced with the best defenses and nuclear power engines.
Our nuclear submarines are undetectable, they could be anywhere and thats one reason why our enemies are a little scared of pulling a nuke attack on us. these subs can stay submersed for years. they are fully independent and carry 120 tactical nukes on board. And we have an undisclosed amount.
2007-02-27 06:10:48 · answer #2 · answered by Indio 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That really depends. The "experts", a few years back decided that - in order to fight a two front war - or to defend the country effectively, we would need a "600-Ship" Blue water Fleet. Since Reagan, our Navy has been retiring ships at a steady rate.
Building "smaller" ships really isn't the answer, having ships that can complete the mission is. Ah, now the question should change to: "So, how many ships would complete the mission?" - and the answer to THAT question is : "Who is in office?" "Are we engaged in nation-building?"
2007-02-27 05:35:32 · answer #3 · answered by Roger 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There are ships being built right now. The USS GeorgeW Bush will be the largest ship in our fleet. It is being commissioned in Virginia. It is a grand ship.
2007-02-27 05:31:08 · answer #4 · answered by Mother 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
US Navy has enough ships to supply itself for eternity
2007-02-27 05:25:11 · answer #5 · answered by PROUD TO BE A LIBERAL TEEN! 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
apparently the good folks at newport news shipyards (newport news, virginia) don't think so, which is why there are always at least three ships being built at any moment.
2007-02-27 05:28:58 · answer #6 · answered by Dayne's gal 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Bring back the Battleships. There is no better sound then hearing a 2000lb shell going over head... Unless your on the receiving end.
2007-02-27 05:30:21 · answer #7 · answered by Alex 4 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Yes.
No.
In that order.
2007-02-27 05:28:45 · answer #8 · answered by hunterentertainment 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋