I don’t think their naval service should justify a carrier being named after them. Don’t get me wrong, I do think they were good and important leaders, but I wouldn’t name a CVN after them; an attack sub or LHA/LHD at most. As capital ships, carriers should bear the names of greatest importance.

The ship naming conventions have followed the changes in the importance of the ship types. Destroyer leaders, later renamed as cruisers (Leahy and Belknap classes) were named in the same convention as destroyers, due to their initial classification. Cruisers built after 75 were named after states, and then the most…

Damn, that’s pretty hilarious!

Our leaders have to accept the fact that we cannot win all the time, especially not in the Middle east; no once can win there, only an undertaker. We should get the hell out of there, for good.

The old Bush was OK, but the young one was as inept as a box of bricks. And fighting an asymmetrical war while obeying the law is very difficult. And W is actually responsible for the rise of ISIL.

I was only joking, I don’t think that carpet bombing the civilians would solve the problem. There are other methods, however; but I don’t think that public or the law would approve them.

Wonder yes, but not miracles. Using a SOF to fight a pitched battle often ends up in disaster; there were plenty of examples of that; most of the ones I can think of were in WW2.

How about this:

With all of the NSA’s capabilities in spying on everything from state leaders to toasters, and their disregard for privacy and law, makes one wonder why aren’t they using the same methods to attack ISIL and their supporters.

Let’s face the facts:

You can’t seriously think that is a bigger issue! I don’t even think that is an issue as such, although, you are right, in a certain way.

What are you talking about, man? I was ranting about a full scale war against a proper opponent, which is not an unlikely scenario in the near future. I was talking about future, not about using a billion dollars worth of sensors to find a Toyota Hilux and blow it up with a million dollar missile.

I could somehow understand Bush, but certainly not now, and not ahead of few other names, but OK, I accept it. Subs also make sense, so perhaps one could’ve been named after Bush instead of a CVN. Before the 21st century, names of the unimpressive and irrelevant politicians were usually reserved for transport ships of…

I think that naming ships after living politicians who haven’t accomplished anything really impressive or historical is beyond stupid. Names like Gabrielle Giffords, George Bush, James Warner and all those other ships named after various SECNAVs and congressmen who haven’t achieved much; while the legendary names like…

I’d kill someone in order to get a chance to fly a Sea Fury; I love that machine!

On the contrary; UN was very afraid of the Chinese and their endless numbers, and I’m sure that Finns are just as afraid of the Russians now. But I think that Russians have reservations about attacking such a fierce opponent; they might defeat the Finnish military but the occupation would be a very bloody one.

We don’t know how to stop! It’s Phantom time:

More RAF and RN!

You again?

That’s actually how the oligarchs got into power during the 90s.