Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (43334)	5/20/2010 6:24:33 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

"Except for" a lot of things not just those two. I didn't say "all the weapons are in use today", I said a lot of them are. I could add other examples that are no longer in use, but there isn't much point in doing so. The weapon systems that are still in use are a vital part of our military. Some obvious examples where the weapons systems designed, brought in to production and/or built during that time period are important now are the M-1 tank, all our heavy bombers except the B-52s, and an important part of our Navy (the Ticonderoga class cruisers where mostly built then, the Arleigh Burke class designed then, and the Wasp class amphibious assault ships, 3 of our carriers where built during that time frame, and we came out with the Whidbey Island class dock landing ship, and a fair portion of our sealift capability, and both of our big Mercy class hospital ships). As for your two examples, the updated battleships where useful, and would still be useful, but arguably not useful enough to justify their high operations costs, or at least not those costs, and the costs to get them operational again. SDI was useful even though it was not built. It put more pressure on the USSR, and it also started technology development towards our current, and future missile defenses.