To: Non-Sequitur
I have no idea. I'm just shocked that it takes 391 sailors to move 500 marines.
I thought that we would have more automation and not have WW2 manpower issues.
83 posted on
07/29/2008 9:10:01 AM PDT by
rmlew
(Liberalism is like AIDS; it destroys the natural defenses of a nation or civilization.)
To: rmlew
I thought that we would have more automation and not have WW2 manpower issues. Hey, we like re-fighting WW2. It's our core competency. And against a WW2-level opponent like the Iraqi Army, we look great.
Against Russian bombers and Chinese submarines sneaking up on our carrier battle groups? Well, let's not discuss that. ;)
90 posted on
07/29/2008 9:42:38 AM PDT by
Mr. Jeeves
("One man's 'magic' is another man's engineering. 'Supernatural' is a null word." -- Robert Heinlein)
To: rmlew
“I thought that we would have more automation and not have WW2 manpower issues.”
Someone else on this thread commented on never trusting the electronics. Add battle damage to that, and bear in mind that self-repairing ships are still science fiction, and maybe you’ll understand why it takes so many people. Someone has to patch the hole below the waterline while someone else fights the ship, and someone else drags the casualties to sickbay, among other things.
99 posted on
07/29/2008 12:39:59 PM PDT by
Old Student
(We have a name for the people who think indiscriminate killing is fine. They're called "The Bad Guys)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson