I agree with you 110%. Thanks for this outstanding explanation of the issue.
I also think that naming of US naval vessels has gone in a bad direction generally. Still plenty of good ones, of course, but I think that ALL navy ships named after persons should be named to honor great warriors. We have a lot more warriors worthy of such honor than we have ships, so we cannot afford to “waste” the slots on anyone but the warriors. I’m also fine with past traditions of naming ships for battles ofc, or for US cities and states. But NOT for civilians chosen for political reasons!!!!
Agreed. The Bon Homme Richard. The Constitution. The America. The Kitty Hawk. The New Jersey. The Midway. The Cowpens. The Lexington. The Saratoga. The Hornet. The Enterprise. The Arleigh Burke.
The John C. Stennis????? I am sure the guy did a lot, but...really? A Nimitz class carrier?
I think they should go back to the old conventions. Carriers after battles. Cruisers after cities. Destroyers after distinguished fighting men. Ammunition ships after volcanoes. Etc.
I would much rather have served on a carrier USS James Doolittle (or even better...USS Hornet) than USS John F. Kennedy.