2018 - Railgun for US Navy.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Fuck you we don't have any mother fucking commissioned battleships https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Constitution.....Stupid ignorant Okees.....

P.S. I used to live in Enid - fuck that place...

\

When I toured the Constitution with the kids and found out it was still commissioned I had an idea for a story where an EMP wipes out our navy and Old Ironsides has to sail out to defend us. From somebody. I didn't get very far.

Not to shock anybody but I'm with Grumps, we already have more naval power than the next dozen or so nations. This is most likely just like the battleships that were the pride and joy of navies from the late 19th century to the end of 1941. Obsolete but sexy as hell to the brass. Even in WWI they were considered too expensive to risk, resulting in only one major battle. Surface ships lives will be measured in days if not hours in the next war between major powers. Anyone remember Repulse and Prince of Wales?

More military ignorance from people who really just want it all to go to food stamps.

Destroyers are not battleships. There's the door.

Guess you showed us.

[heydaralon]

Guess you showed us.

How would you feel about this rail gun if they they put it on the ISS or in space? You'd have to admit that would be pretty fucking cool. It would be like Moonraker.

[SuburbanFarmer]

Guess you showed us.

How would you feel about this rail gun if they they put it on the ISS or in space? You'd have to admit that would be pretty fucking cool. It would be like Moonraker.

Exactly the same as I feel about it now. Complete waste of my money, to create shitty jobs and prop up the MIC.

[The Conservative]

Guess you showed us.

How would you feel about this rail gun if they put it on the ISS or in space? You'd have to admit that would be pretty fucking cool. It would be like Moonraker.

Not possible, unless it's space only projectile. Entering through the atmosphere it would be destroyed.

That being said, you are seriously not understanding the situation here, but it's better to deal with things like emotions than logic to some people it seems.

[heydaralon]

Guess you showed us.

How would you feel about this rail gun if they put it on the ISS or in space? You'd have to admit that would be pretty fucking cool. It would be like Moonraker.

Not possible, unless it's space only projectile. Entering through the atmosphere it would be destroyed.

That being said, you are seriously not understanding the situation here, but it's better to deal with things like emotions than logic to some people it seems.

Who is not understanding the situation?

[The Conservative]

How would you feel about this rail gun if they put it on the ISS or in space? You'd have to admit that would be pretty fucking cool. It would be like Moonraker.

Not possible, unless it's space only projectile. Entering through the atmosphere it would be destroyed.

That being said, you are seriously not understanding the situation here, but it's better to deal with things like emotions than logic to some people it seems.

Who is not understanding the situation?

Most people it seems...

[Montegriffo]

It's not like you have anything better to spend $35,000,000,000 on is it? Infrastructure all up to date, healthcare system already perfect, environment in tip top condition, crime and gang violence under control, 0% unemployment etc etc....
Now you have returned to isolationism and non-interventionalism it's important to keep your MIC in profit, I mean what are taxes for if not propping up the arms industry?

[StCapps]

It's not like you have anything better to spend $35,000,000,000 on is it? Infrastructure all up to date, healthcare system already perfect, environment in tip top condition, crime and gang violence under control, 0% unemployment etc etc....
Now you have returned to isolationism and non-interventionalism it's important to keep your MIC in profit, I mean what are taxes for if not propping up the arms industry?

If you are going to spend any taxpayer money on the military, it's got to go somewhere. So unless you are advocating spending nothing on defense, I don't see your point.

[heydaralon]

We nearly lost WW2 because the unemployment rate wasn't 0% and we couldn't justify defense spending while 4% of the workforce was out of a job. Plus there were gangs and trash in a river so we couldn't waste money on a Navy.

[Montegriffo]

The only alternative to massive over spending on defence is spending nothing on defence? Must be great living in a black and white world. Saves all that time wasted on comprimising and negotiating...