The Headline Says it All

A very clever headline: The Navy's Floating Fiasco. The article is very fair, because it is true... and it helps that it includes this sentence.

Navy officials say the third and fourth vessels are performing much better.

Too bad the rest of the article is kick in the nuts for the USS San Antonio (LPD 17). The path ahead for the Navy (and NGSS) is clear, get three and four right. It really is too bad the article breaks down near the end.

The rush to produce the fleet might make military sense if they were needed, but the last time Marines stormed ashore — the key reason the taxpayer is spending $14 billion on the San Antonio, and at least eight more ships just like it — was nearly 60 years ago, at Inchon during the Korean War.

Uhm, because the most flexible ships in the fleet are only good for Inchon landings? Mark Thompson is a good national security reporter, but that comment highlights the limitations of his strategic vision. I guess we can write his name down with the group who believes the Navy needs more battleships.

Hopefully the Obama administration is smarter. I know, my analysis lately is weak because I won't argue points like this. I am waiting for the NOC.