[Bubba Ho-Tep]

Why would a WWI era capital ship try to come up Charleston's harbor? And if it did, would two guns stop it? The Geography of Charleston harbor was a sufficient defense all of it's own.

You clearly don't understand much about offshore bombardment and amphibious operations. To attack a coastal point, it's not necessary to sail your biggest battleships up to the docks. You sit offshore and shell, then you send in lighter craft. In WW2, battleships were able to provide a great deal of support for landing operations without ever having to tie up to a pier on, say, Okinawa.

Just two coastal guns after 1897, and which never saw combat. Pointless. Big waste of money. Never amounted to anything useful.

As I said before, our nuclear missile force has never seen combat. I suppose they're useless and a big waste of money that have never amounted to anything useful by the standards you set. There's this concept, maybe you've heard of it, called "deterence."

[DiogenesLamp]

You clearly don't understand much about offshore bombardment and amphibious operations. To attack a coastal point, it's not necessary to sail your biggest battleships up to the docks. You sit offshore and shell, then you send in lighter craft.

And two guns on Ft. Sumter was going to stop this?

As I said before, our nuclear missile force has never seen combat. I suppose they're useless and a big waste of money...

Wasn't funny the first time you told it.