The "too muchness" of the names is part of why I like them. Besides, what doesn't scream "too much" about a 100,000 ton, 5 acre floating airfield capable of projecting more military power than most entire nations?
edited 23rd Aug '17 10:48:22 AM by Balmung
Because I can't help but giggle at the absurdness and hubris.
Not to mention the Who's on First? jokes you can make. Which is part of the problem I have with named after naval battles, the Coral Sea had to have caused some confusion.
edited 23rd Aug '17 10:57:13 AM by Memers
My Hair Provides Affordable Healthcare
I just want there to be a navy with the guts to blatantly adopt a ship naming scheme based off of the purple prose of Halo.
Imagine a USS Arms of Freedom, Arsenal of Democracy, Amendment of Liberty, or Roar of Free Speech. ![[lol]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/lol2v12_4863.png "[lol]"){kind=small}
In actual news though.
Newsweek: As Trump Announces New Troops Surge, Here of Six Blunders the US Made in Afghanistan
The U.S. and its NATO allies launched their invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 in a mission to oust the ruling Taliban and deny the militants who planned the 9/11 attacks a safe haven while establishing a democratic state.
Sixteen years later and the U.S. involvement in the central Asian country shows no signs of coming to an end. President Donald Trump bowed to pressure from military officials and announced a 4,000-troop surge Monday.
Below, Newsweek reviews some of the blunders the U.S. has made over the decade and a half of its involvement.
- 1. Going it alone against the Taliban
The U.S. made a key mistake early, in refusing help from NATO allies to defeat the Taliban after the invasion, according to experts.
Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld reportedly believed that defeating the Islamist militia was a task best accomplished by the U.S. alone, without other militaries getting in the way, and he appeared vindicated when the Taliban rapidly crumpled.
However, when U.S. forces were pulled out to take part in the 2004 invasion of Iraq, NATO forces were insufficient to prevent Taliban forces from re-establishing a foothold.
“By the time NATO got involved big time, a new civil war was underway and the best opportunity to build a stable Afghanistan had been squandered,” wrote Stephen Walt, the Robert and Renée Belfer professor of international relations at Harvard, in Foreign Policy magazine in 2014.
- 2. Planning based on wishful thinking
In a 2010 report, Pentagon chiefs detailed significant failings in the past decade’s U.S. military campaign in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The report reserved its toughest criticism for how the U.S. handled key transition moments, such as NATO's 2006 takeover of military operations in Afghanistan.
In Afghanistan, “the planning assumed that the chief duty” of international troops after 2006 would be reconstruction and humanitarian aid—an assumption that turned out to be widely off the mark as the Taliban launched an insurgency.
The reason, the report says, was that military planning was based on “U.S. expectations instead of those consistent with the host nation and mission”—in other words, wishful thinking.
“For example,” the report notes, “the planned end-state for Afghanistan was envisioned to be a strong central government despite no record of such a government in its history and lack of broad popular support for that system of governance.”
- 3. Corrupt governance
The 2004 constitution for the post-Taliban Afghanistan established a republican state, in which the government in Kabul and President Hamid Karzai wielded enormous authority, bypassing local traditions of regional autonomy.
The system was ripe for exploitation by corrupt officials, who established extensive patronage networks. It also lacked the resources and staff to function efficiently, rendering the country dependent on foreign assistance.
“Most Afghans care little for Kabul, however, and even less so for the men Kabul sends to lead their local governance. They want local officials who look like them, speak like them, and whom they know. The lack of coordination between top down government and bottom up democracy only adds to dysfunction,” wrote Michael Rubin, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a senior lecturer at the Naval Postgraduate School in 2012.
- 4. Spiraling drug trade
In the wake of the 2001 invasion, the U.S. pledged to wipe out Afghanistan’s opiate trade, which is the source of much of the world’s heroin.
The U.S. government has spent $12 billion on eradication efforts, yet Afghanistan now supplies around 90 percent of the world’s opium.
Some critics argue that the higher prices commanded by opium as a result of eradication efforts has incentivized impoverished farmers to crow poppies, boosting opium production.
Others point to local corruption and flat-rate taxes imposed in Taliban-controlled areas as factors, with poppies cheaper to harvest and more lucrative than legal crops.
The Taliban has profited from the botched eradication efforts, forming cartels to control production and distribution, and taking an estimated $200 million to $400 million a year from the illicit opium economy.
- 5. Millions spent on Italian goats
The U.S. has spent hundreds of millions attempting to boost the legitimate Afghan economy, with the Task Force for Business Stability Operations (TFBSO), a U.S. Department of Defense agency, spending $800 million on various projects and initiatives from 2009 to 2015.
Among those detailed in a 2015 Senate hearing was a bid to boost the cashmere industry by importing nine rare Italian goats. The goats went missing, presumably eaten, and the $6 million project was never completed.
John Sopko, the special inspector general for Afghanistan reconstruction, testified at the hearing that many TFBSO projects had been managed poorly or not at all and that they suffered from “waste, fraud and abuse.”
- 6. Obama surge
Soon after taking office, President Barack Obama ordered a troop surge in Afghanistan to combat a resurgent Taliban, with the president initially committing 17,000 extra troops to the country and then a further 30,000 in 2009.
Like Vietnam, the US apparently cannot into COIN due to the crippling potent nature of our leadership cycling between ideologically opposing factions every four years, which prevents the development and adherence to a coherent long-term strategy amidst short-term electoral priorities. 
edited 23rd Aug '17 11:03:25 AM by FluffyMcChicken
One of my friends has been amusing himself citing examples of Mr. Trump calling out President Obama for doing the exact things that President Trump is now advocating for. His Twitter feed makes it really easy to find examples.
Guess a new perspective makes for a hell of a difference in views.
One of my favorite examples of "Come At Me!" ship names is HMS Dreadnought, from a Badass Boast which can be best summed up as "If you aren't the Almighty, I'll take ya."
Causing freakouts over sourcing since 2018
Stuff at the Russian Army-2017 show. Lots of Kalashnikov Concern products on show.
I kind of want that electric bike. If I weren't broke and actually had a motorcycle license...
I have disagreed with her a lot, but comparing her to republicans and propagandists of dictatorships is really low. - An idiot
excuse me while i giggle about the shield's name
United Earth
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Complete with "you say run" for a soundtrack? ("California... SMASH!")
edited 23rd Aug '17 3:05:07 PM by TheHandle
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Cape Malleum Majorem
In The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, they (briefly) mentioned warships with names like GSS Daring, GSS Audacity, and GSS Suicidal Insanity.
This Space Intentionally Left Blank.
There was a bit in one of the Honor Harrington books where two unrelated starships happened to have the same name, one of them being a pirate ship masquerading as a legitimate maritime authority as part of a scheme to get merchants to let them aboard without a fight, and the other a Manticoran Merchant Cruiser which was basically a merchant ship packing a Battlecruiser's broadside.
Fun thing happened when the Merchant Cruiser's commander heard about some pirates sullying the good name of her ship.
United Earth
Reminds a little of that time the SMS Cap Trafalgar got sunk by HMS Carmania, the very ship Cap Trafalgar was pretending to be. Unfortunately, the bit about Carmania also being disguised as Cap Trafalgar is apparently a myth.
edited 23rd Aug '17 4:45:19 PM by Balmung
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
I am diggin that motorcycle.
What other info do we have on those new rifles though? I'm super curious about those.
Oh really when?
Looks like the peace delegates (high school students) from Japan have presented letters of disarmament to the Disarmament office in Geneva. Only trouble they got is from unnamed countries that didn't want them to speak.
My Hair Provides Affordable Healthcare
How does "enlarged testicular veins" hampers one's physical performance again?
On the other hand, it does make sense that a male recruit who ejaculates before having to do PT is going to have a rough time finding energy and stamina when he needs it the most.
. . . Not sure about women though . . .
Obesity is a significant problem for China with its rapidly growing middle class. The second part confuses me, although it does seem to tie in to the reality that quite a lot of people would rather be on the internet than join the army.
Then again, this is the PLA...
edited 24th Aug '17 11:01:24 AM by TerminusEst
Si Vis Pacem, Para Perkele
It's the Chinese state media, so factual accuracy questionable. I can believe the obesity issue but the masturbation one sounds moar like prudish fake news.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Oh, bother.
It's Chinese state news. Take it with a heap of salt.
Disgusted, but not surprised
The law in the night
Private Chang! Clean the white mess your colleagues left on the hallway!
I can't, too busy masturbating.
Inter arma enim silent leges
Professional Writer & Amateur Scholar
Random thought:
Me back in basics: HOLY SHIT, IT'S A SERGEANT FIRST CLASS!
Me now: Oh hey, look. A colonel.
With that said, an unannounced visit to the office by a sergeant major is still not a good way to start a day.
edited 24th Aug '17 10:11:47 PM by dRoy
I'm a (socialist) professional writer serializing a WWII alternate history webnovel.
In Basic we'd shit our pants at a Tech Sergeant passing by.
By the time I left Germany, I was making idle chatter with a one-star.
Professional Writer & Amateur Scholar
My dad told me that in regular ROK Army, a soldier is probably going to never see anyone higher than 0-5. Me? Well, now I've seen so many one star and above I lost track of it.
There was one time when me and a bunch of KATUS As were just walking by and suddenly a goddamn major general pulled over and asked us where are our pro-masks (it was a pro-mask wearing day). We collectively went "Oh shit" that moment.
I was once flagged down as an airman by a Major General at an Air Force Birthday Ball maybe a decade ago. He was prior-enlisted and wanted to chat with some of the new airmen to see how things were going for us.
Probably the only time I've addressed a general officer while carrying an alcoholic beverage in uniform.
There was one time when me and a bunch of KATUS As were just walking by and suddenly a goddamn major general pulled over and asked us where are our pro-masks
Pro-masks?
Also, how high can Predator and Reaper drones fly? I mean, I can understand if that be publicly revealed, but how high should it be to be undetectable?
Enterprise, amusingly enough, draws its name from a long line of Royal Navy ships (there is in fact an HMS Enterprise in service today, with a mission rather closer to the Starship Enterprise than to the aircraft carrier). An Imperial Star Destroyer by that name would be peak lol though for obvious reasons.
edited 23rd Aug '17 10:30:53 AM by AFP