Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In December 2024, in the thread "Re: BRK: Why Not XOM?", BreckHutHigh asked the members: "What about the long road trips with kids?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (62) |
Author: Steve203 🐝 HONORARY
SHREWD
  😊 😞

Number: of 84361 
Subject: Re: Those Trump Class "Battleships"
Date: 12/23/25 10:08 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 3

I cannot imagine how this ever happens. Trump is trying to set naval strategy based on nostalgia,

Set policy based on size envy. The Soviets built the Kirov class in the 70s and 80s. The "Trump" is an update of the Kirov class.

en.wikipedia.org - Kirov class battlecruiser

The concept is not entirely without merit. General Van Riper, 20 years ago, showed how a mass attack by cruise missiles or drones can easily overwhelm a carrier group's defenses. A larger hull can accommodate more armament. There is a name, which slips my mind at the moment, for the mathematical rule that states that internal volume increases at a greater rate than the increase in overall size of a ship. The Kirov has a three layer SAM armament, a mix of long, medium, and short range missiles, as well as several CIWS mounts. That dense of a defense could raise the bar on how large a mass attack would need to be to saturate the defenses. What I don't see in the specs for the Kirov is a large capacity for launching chaff.

The next question is how to pay for it? What to take away from the Proles, to pay for the ships, after giving more tax cuts to the "JCs"? The thought crossed my mind: funding it by public subscription. The Grifter in Chief has been hawking Bibles, sneakers, watches, guitars, and other assorted garbage, for years. Now he can offer the clueless a "chance to make American sea power great" by paying for his latest monument to himself. I have seen numbers in the $5B range per ship. Lessee....77M votes in 24, that's only a $65 "donation" by every Trump voter. That is cheap,buy Trump crap standards. Then add in all the "donations" by school children in red states.

Will they actually be built? Considering the track record of recent USN programs: Zumwalt, LCS, Constellation, I expect Billions to be spent on "development", and maybe some steel cut, before it's cancelled, and the "donations" disappear into his nibs' pocket.

Steve
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to Steve203 here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 84,309 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (62) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community