Too much money at stake. Everyone protects their position.

Battleships are big and showy, all image and not rational for today's warfare reality.

It's like how obsessed he is with who he is photographed with, no less than perfect bodies near him. And then there's his passion for TV personalities whether they have half a brain and any knowledge that suits them for cabinet positions.

Trump's new battleship will be a slow (30-35 knots) lumbering beast that would represent an easy kill for any sophisticated military like Russia, or China, and even a forward thinking country with a much smaller military.
Aircraft carriers are not much better.
We look good when we're fighting a war against small, relatively primitive military forces, but if Iran's missile program was a little bit further along, that may have been able to launch deadly attacks against any of our surface ships in the region.
It's becoming evident that the world of warfare has transformed over the past decade into something that makes any and all stationary, or slow moving, targets vulnerable. Weapons that cost in the hundreds of thousands of dollars can destroy a billion dollar target; overwhelming it's defenses by sending large numbers of drones or missiles at once.
Land targets fare no better.
Russia has learned in Ukraine that using decades old technology against an adversary can be beaten back by these new technologies.
We are now seeing the same thing with Iran.
The question I have is, what good would it be to have a battleship named after Trump? It would still be a loser, just like it's namesake.

It is one of the first places that trained Ukrainians on using drones just after Russia invaded. Those people were not only quick learners, they figured out ways to use these weapons the US operators had not yet considered. Impressive people who are NOT going to give into Russia.

Read about Ukrainians training in England too. The British troops who worked with them lined the road off the base when they left to go back to fight in Ukraine in a salute of honor to the students who surpassed their teachers.

Trump is so out of touch he and his stupid ideas are a national security risk. But it works for Putin, so....

Trump is a threat to our military personnel, as are all the people he has had place into positions of authority.

a billion mistakes per second.

The "speed of tech" is illusory. Million dollar missiles vs motorcycle engine drones.

Which is something Shitler and Kegsbreath just don't get, nor do some in Congress. The military is its men and women, and Kegsbreath has gotten rid of some of its best top brass just because they wouldn't play kiss-ass with him.

My grandson was going to enlist until Shitler was elected. He had planned to go pretty much the same route as his uncle, A round of active duty, then the National Guard, school of some kind, and then work on heavy equipment. His ASVABS were as high as his uncle's, but he said he wanted to work on tanks "because they bring them to you and you don't have to go out on convoy to retrieve them." Smart lad! But the day after the election everything changed. Now he works construction during the summer and in restaurants during the winter. He refuses to go into the military as long as there is a RepubliKKKan president. Which is too bad for them, because he'd make a good soldier.

My other-son (my late son's best friend), who is a career NCO, can't wait to get out. He's been an Army DI for the past 15 years after having been an MP previously and says he's just over it now with Kegsbreath and counting the days. He says the quality of recruits he gets these days has gone way down since Shitler was elected and he knows why.

End of story.

Capability is useless without effective operational and strategic planning.

Trump and Kegsbreath are morons. And they've elevated military leaders who are "yes men." No one will tell Kegsbreath and Trump that their plan sucks. Our troops were not properly prepared for this. They were not properly supported. We no longer have principled professionals running our military. Like Russia, we now select military leadership based on political loyaty instead of competence. We should expect Russia-like results.

I don't remember the details but it was about a U.S. colonel and his Vietnamese counterpart who met after the war. The American colonel told his counterpart we won every battle to which his counterpart answered but we won the war. If this ends with Iran controling the Strait and with it the ability to cow the world it will be seen as the greatest strategic blunder in the history of the republic.

But in this case, there are quite a few examples of tactical buffoonery too. The fact that a 60's era fighter was able to actually attack one of our bases? Nuts. Losing a E-3 ON THE GROUND!? Insane.

If we need to build more drones or anti-drones we can. The problem is leadership and matching tactical goals to strategic goals. Henry Kissinger said the weaker party wins by not losing and the stronger party loses by not winning.

to the tune of “We Are the Champions,” treating even minor disagreement as seditious propaganda and declaring we were entering the post-invasion mop-up phase of our total victory.

Now I’m paying 57% more for gasoline since those baseless claims were made so recklessly. Someone’s definitely mopping up... but it certainly isn't us.

Just as in the little dispute 2.5 centuries ago, for one example.

Will be quite diminished from this recent quagmire....I mean excursion

The Golden Dome is just another facet of the incoming new identity of isolationism seeing our diplomatic and military influence is deteriorating at a swift pace

The US spends more on military than the next ten countries combined - Russia, China, UK, etc - with poorer outcome. Like health care. It's all about corporate hands in our pockets.

in the world, but if the leaders don't know how or when to use it, it doesn't mean all that much. Like throwing money and innocent lives out the window.