tap tap ? Is that really the way you want to discuss, I mean now you are sounding like a 4 year old.

Anyway why did every other major navy in the world put their battleships to the RIP in the 50's/early 60's?

If it's such a wonderful, multiple role capable, cost effienct weapons system, why did e.g. the Brits and French gave theirs up?

__________________
"Homo Homini Lupus"
Thomas Hobbes

if I did i didn't mean to. my language was clear as bell on this. all the way through. im sorry Hammer. you just don't get it. you seem very very confused. I did my best.
the Marines are the dept of the Navy. you don't seem to make this historical connection. a Marine could figue out what im talking about with ease. Im sorry but you just don't talk like one. I do not believe you ever served.
im finished with you. and good luck

then why did the the US government keep these in service. got a clue???? its very easy. and I posted the link. which you failed to read.

BTY I toured the U-505 museum. know where that's at??? Chicago Ill. wonder how it got there????

then why did the the US government keep these in service. got a clue???? its very easy. and I posted the link. which you failed to read.

BTY I toured the U-505 museum. know where that's at??? Chicago Ill. wonder how it got there???? "Auf Wiedersehen!"

You said this in response to Stapo's comment that battleships were outdated after WW2:

Implying that somehow their attraction of tourists means something in relation to their military value.

Seems like the only one confused here is you, namvet. I understand that battleships provided gunfire support to Marines on the beach. However, that doesn't change the fact that there were plenty of other ships that could provide that support just as effectively and cheaper. I won't even get into CAS. Yes, after WW2, the battleship was obsolete.

Also I find it funny how, when confronted with facts and opposing view points, you attack my military service. Besides, how would you know if 'talk like one' if you were never a Marine? Please, don't presume to think you are one of us.

__________________
I am a liberal, a classical liberal. Classical liberalism is liberalism, but the current collectivists have captured that designation in the United States. In Europe they are glad enough to call themselves socialists. But no one in America wants to be called socialist and admit what they are.

Courage, Truth, Honor, Fidelity, Discipline, Hospitality, Industriousness, Self-Reliance, Perseverance

the internet will answer both your questions. bye bye.

So you make baseless statements, offering no proof to back them up, and then tell us to do our own research? Sorry my friend, but the burden of proof lies solely with you. Again, no one is debating that battleships provided gunfire support. What is being debated here is was that ability enough to keep them around after WW2, even after that ability was matched by smaller ships and surpassed by CAS.

__________________
I am a liberal, a classical liberal. Classical liberalism is liberalism, but the current collectivists have captured that designation in the United States. In Europe they are glad enough to call themselves socialists. But no one in America wants to be called socialist and admit what they are.

Courage, Truth, Honor, Fidelity, Discipline, Hospitality, Industriousness, Self-Reliance, Perseverance

Funnily I've read the same wiki-article, but wasn't aware that you had linked it.

Anyway can you imagine that people read the same source and still end up making different jugdements?

__________________
"Homo Homini Lupus"
Thomas Hobbes

Yeah, governments always behave rationally...
I mean, a government has never kept around military units for silly reasons....

__________________

they went from being the primary naval weapon to being the tag along for the way of the future. I was saying that the battleship was obsolete as the central naval unit of a modern fleet. Yes, a few purposes were found, but that is not relevant to the context of the discussion (Japan's possession of two battleships in 1945 does not demonstrate that they are offense-capable.

__________________

Dude, the united states has spent billions if not trillions on weapons it has never used. You are giving government waaay too much credit.

The battleship was there because it was engaging the third world

the naval war in the pacific was warfare between two modern nations. In that context, the battleship was obsolete. Against backward nations, not so much.

Once again, you are approaching things from a way too simple perspective to keep up with this discussion. thanks anyway.

__________________

Do you always give government the benefit of the doubt? I am glad our founding fathers didn't defer to the legitimacy of government to the extreme that you do.

__________________

once again, you are hiding behind an assumed competency of government which you have failed to substantiate. Governments invest millions if not billions into illusions. Illusions keep governments in power.

Thor Hammer and I have owned you in every facet of this discussion. Thanks for playing.

__________________

you are so spineless