Flagship - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

This is a the archive of the "PoFo Parliament". A user-run project.
Forum rules: This is a the archive of the "PoFo Parliament". A user-run project.
User avatar
By MB.
#1922452
I would like to gain support for a movement to raise the funds to acquire and modernize the USS Iowa from the United States reserve naval graveyard in Suisun Bay, Sacramento, to be named and recommissioned as the flagship of the PoFo Republican navy.

Image

USS Iowa is on the near right.
User avatar
By ingliz
#1922619
Why?
User avatar
By Donna
#1922646
It appears the SN-RF government has to deal with a militarist dissent to their limp-wristedness.
User avatar
By ingliz
#1922722
Why waste money on something that has no military value?
User avatar
By MB.
#1922738
no military value?


What are you talking about? I should stage a coup just for that retarded comment.
User avatar
By ingliz
#1922741
Unless you are standing off the coast of some godforsaken third world banana republic what possible use it; remember the "General Belgrano".
User avatar
By MB.
#1922744
:roll:
User avatar
By Thunderhawk
#1922844
I oppose.
'tis a waste of money.
User avatar
By Zagadka
#1923128
Crazy idea here, just thinking outside of the box... how about we NOT put the command flag on a relic over 60 years old?

My token gesture would be making the flagship a heavy naval rescue ship, with the ability to launch helicopters (many countries have this kind of carrier).
User avatar
By Thunderhawk
#1923196
Spain, Portugal and Iceland are our neighbours. They have traditionally agressive fishing fleets. Would we be using our navy to protect our water from over fishing? And by protect, I mean sink those who violate our waters.
User avatar
By MB.
#13050169
Well obviously we'd blow anyone who fucked with us out of the water.
User avatar
By Figlio di Moros
#13050670
MB. wrote:I would like to gain support for a movement to raise the funds to acquire and modernize the USS Iowa from the United States reserve naval graveyard in Suisun Bay, Sacramento, to be named and recommissioned as the flagship of the PoFo Republican navy.


No, it's a completely retarded idea; we're trying to build a modern Navy, not one that was obsolete in WWII.

OOC- if we're gonna go with a relic for a flag ship, how about we dig up an old wooden ship, something akin to the USS Constitution or the HMS Guerriere? While it'll never be used in battle, it'd serve well to motivate our sailors and promote pride in their heritage & service.
User avatar
By Thunderhawk
#13051228
if we're gonna go with a relic for a flag ship, how about we dig up an old wooden ship, something akin to the USS Constitution or the HMS Guerriere? While it'll never be used in battle, it'd serve well to motivate our sailors and promote pride in their heritage & service.


I like and support this idea.
User avatar
By MB.
#13051252
not one that was obsolete in WWII


USS Iowa is still not obsolete today.

While it'll never be used in battle, it'd serve well to motivate our sailors and promote pride in their heritage & service.


Such a scheme would be useful only for educational purposes, especially considering that the decayed carapaces of the wooden frigates you suggest raising cannot be exposed to oxygen for any sustained duration.

how about we NOT put the command flag on a relic over 60 years old?


HMS Victory was 47 when it flew the flag of Nelson at Trafalgar.
User avatar
By Dave
#13051442
ingliz wrote:Unless you are standing off the coast of some godforsaken third world banana republic what possible use it; remember the "General Belgrano".

What ASW capability did the Argentine Navy have? At any rate I just read the Wikipedia article about this, and I discovered that some people in the UK protested this sinking because Argentine sailors died. The horror, enemy sailors being killed in wartime!
User avatar
By MB.
#13051450
Dave you are aware of the controversy: specifically, the Thatcher government had made it clear that it would not target vessels outside or sailing away from the exclusion zone. It is the clear violation of that (British Government) policy that concerned British civilians at the time.
User avatar
By Potemkin
#13051463
And let's not forget the mysterious disappearing log book. :lol:
User avatar
By Dave
#13051468
MB. wrote:Dave you are aware of the controversy: specifically, the Thatcher government had made it clear that it would not target vessels outside or sailing away from the exclusion zone. It is the clear violation of that (British Government) policy that concerned British civilians at the time.

Exclusion zones concern neutral powers, not belligerents. The freaking Kaiser declared an exclusion zone during WWI. It seems to me that these protesters were, as usual, pathetic lovers of weakness.
User avatar
By Vladimir
#13051813
It seems to me that these protesters were, as usual, pathetic lovers of weakness.

Dave's brilliant :lol:
User avatar
By MB.
#13051816
Dave is correct, of course. The surplus people and the subhuman peaceniks should be killed or sterilized or at the least, forced to eat meat as children. The surplus women (more liberal peaceniks!) should be trained to give Dave anal sex whenever he wants it and to fulfil all his other inane desires and demands.

[T]he [N]orth did not partake in the institution […]

Who is? The protest at the U of A did not do tha[…]

Is it happening to you right now? Bring on the vi[…]

Judaism is older than Christianity, dude. And I[…]