The U.S. Navy has christened a ship named after slain gay rights leader Harvey Milk

Ruff 364

Full Member
Full Member
Minuteman
  • Feb 18, 2017
    347
    347
    So now we name US ships after a known pedophile?




    Let's go Brandon.
     
    1636780696769.jpeg

    here-we-see-a-rare-photo-of-a-submarine-surfacing-5178771.png

    Why does Army now have a hard time beating Navy? Cause Navy really knows how to tackle men and score!

    (I think the dysfunctional vets may have warped my fragile little mind)
     
    When a country like the U.S starts naming ships after gays & paedophiles, that country is in serious decline.
    For anyone who wonders how the Roman empire collapsed, look no further.
    Not trying to stir shit. I find this truly disappointing.
    Man, you drew the line way late. Allowing women in Combat, and on ships, didn't signal anything? Inch/Mile mean anything? Females "passing" Ranger School? SEALS? WTtotalF? A man dressing as a woman as the Senior Admiral? THAT wasn't going too far? Naming ships is the residue after the dumpster fire.
     
    Man, you drew the line way late. Allowing women in Combat, and on ships, didn't signal anything? Inch/Mile mean anything? Females "passing" Ranger School? SEALS? WTtotalF? A man dressing as a woman as the Senior Admiral? THAT wasn't going too far? Naming ships is the residue after the dumpster fire.
    I see your point.
    Fucking sad though.
    The saddest part is how deep the corruption & or blackmail runs for the top brass to agree to this shit.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Milf Dots
    Man, you drew the line way late. Allowing women in Combat, and on ships, didn't signal anything? Inch/Mile mean anything? Females "passing" Ranger School? SEALS? WTtotalF? A man dressing as a woman as the Senior Admiral? THAT wasn't going too far? Naming ships is the residue after the dumpster fire.
    Allowing women in combat never stopped the Soviet Machine. While I will grant that as a sexual dimorphic species men had an advantage at physical tasks, if a woman can train to an acceptable level, then have at it.

    I think your beef is with the lowering of the standards, which I agree with.

    Also consider that not all combat is purely physical. There may be some tasks more suited to woman then men (There were reports of superior performance in fighter pilots by woman --Its been a while so I don't know if its a one off or what).

    What if a woman could pass ranger school or BUDs training? You say they can't but for highly motivated individuals that's just gas on the fire.

    The real problem is ignoring the statistics that statistically men will be favored for combat roles. So while it makes sense to allow women in combat, its not a 50/50 thing. You have to train to high standards. Its the lowering of the standards thats the problem.

    If you can do the job, and do it well, I don't give a shit what your gender is.

    BUt if you ask me to use your prefered pronouns, I'll frag you like a bad habit.
     
    Allowing women in combat never stopped the Soviet Machine. While I will grant that as a sexual dimorphic species men had an advantage at physical tasks, if a woman can train to an acceptable level, then have at it.

    I think your beef is with the lowering of the standards, which I agree with.

    Also consider that not all combat is purely physical. There may be some tasks more suited to woman then men (There were reports of superior performance in fighter pilots by woman --Its been a while so I don't know if its a one off or what).

    What if a woman could pass ranger school or BUDs training? You say they can't but for highly motivated individuals that's just gas on the fire.

    The real problem is ignoring the statistics that statistically men will be favored for combat roles. So while it makes sense to allow women in combat, its not a 50/50 thing. You have to train to high standards. Its the lowering of the standards thats the problem.

    If you can do the job, and do it well, I don't give a shit what your gender is.

    BUt if you ask me to use your prefered pronouns, I'll frag you like a bad habit.
    I blame troops for not keeping the brass inline, did they lock up the M67's at some point ?
     
    • Like
    Reactions: deersniper
    I was thinking on this today because one of my beefs is the shitty way we name our ships. So in a minor threadjack, rather than naming our ships after cultural 'hereos' such as those whose only claim to fame is failing to duck while being gay:

    (1) We need a USS Montana--it needs to be a CV. They got left out. IF this is confusing--read naval history.
    (2) We need a flagship/capital ship named Ranger. You know why
    (3) The following ship names should always be on capital ships: Intrepid, Enterprise, Essex, Ranger, Constitution
    (4) Stop naming CVs after Presidents.
    (5) Adopt British style names: Dreadnaught, Inflexibile, Invincible, etc....
    (6) Where are big ships named "Decateur, Jones, Farragut, King, Spurance, Halsey" etc... Yes some of them have little DD's named after them. I bet they would be pissed.
    (7) We need a SSBN named 'Shaft' cause they will F you up. (And its multicultural!) Make it happen.
     
    I was thinking on this today because one of my beefs is the shitty way we name our ships. So in a minor threadjack, rather than naming our ships after cultural 'hereos' such as those whose only claim to fame is failing to duck while being gay:

    (1) We need a USS Montana--it needs to be a CV. They got left out. IF this is confusing--read naval history.
    (2) We need a flagship/capital ship named Ranger. You know why
    (3) The following ship names should always be on capital ships: Intrepid, Enterprise, Essex, Ranger, Constitution
    (4) Stop naming CVs after Presidents.
    (5) Adopt British style names: Dreadnaught, Inflexibile, Invincible, etc....
    (6) Where are big ships named "Decateur, Jones, Farragut, King, Spurance, Halsey" etc... Yes some of them have little DD's named after them. I bet they would be pissed.
    (7) We need a SSBN named 'Shaft' cause they will F you up. (And its multicultural!) Make it happen.
    USS Montana is a Virginia Class Submarine, SSN 794.
    Enterprise will be CVN 80. Delivery is 2028. 79 is JFK, 81 is USS Doris Miller, 82 Unnamed still.
    Fuck the Brits, we fought a war to do it our own way.
    The Navy doesn't have big ships unless you count carriers and amphibs. Don't disrespect tin can sailors.
    I kinda like the Shaft idea. Except it might cause confusion. The screws might stop but the shafting never does.
     
    just setting the stage for naming a carrier after Biden.... it is NOT my Navy, any longer.... this is a sickness that will effect readiness of the fleets... just when we need strength, we have weakness in body and mind...
     
    • Like
    Reactions: 308pirate
    The point being names are being done for "Politics" and not important US Navy figures.

    And most people don't have a damn clue about their history. (Such as Montana never having a battleship named for it, who John Paul Jones is, etc etc etc.)
     
    So now we name US ships after a known pedophile?




    Let's go Brandon.

    Ammo for the main gun

    pride9-426x351.jpg
     
    • Haha
    Reactions: Ruff 364
    The point being names are being done for "Politics" and not important US Navy figures.

    And most people don't have a damn clue about their history. (Such as Montana never having a battleship named for it, who John Paul Jones is, etc etc etc.)
    Congress has fucked over the Navy the last couple of decades, the Gabby Giffords, the Harvey Milk, 2 LCS hulls that suck, the list goes on.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: Milf Dots