Update
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Missile/Drone Intercept by U.S. Navy Destroyer in Red Sea Shows Why We Need a Bigger Navy

The USS Carney, a U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyer in the northern Red Sea, on Thursday shot down multiple missiles and drones launched by Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen that the Pentagon said were potentially headed toward targets in Israel.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/us-navy-destroyer-red-sea-185700181.html

---

How long before state sponsored terrorists launch missiles or drones directly at the United States by concealing them on ships, possibly even hijacking ships on the high seas and using them as platforms to launch such attacks?

It's clear that a bigger navy is needed to intercept such attacks anywhere near our coastlines as well as to be continuously on station near hostile nations, such as Iran and North Korea.

We also need our national missile defense system to encompass protecting our southern border should terrorists smuggle such weapon platforms into Mexico.

After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the Bush administration reached out to Hollywood screen writers to envision scenarios in which terrorist attacks might occur against the United States because of the alleged lack of imagination in our national security aparatus. 🤔

Let's not wait for another terrorist attack on our soil before we engage in prepardedness to help thwart such attacks.

We need a trillion dollar national defense budget... NOW!
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Vin53 · M
I just can't accept this argument. You're literally saying we need to expand our navy to allow us to better protect other countries? Are they paying for it?
beckyromero · 36-40, FVIP
@Vin53

Yes, that is what I am saying.

About 90% of goods around the world move over the seas.

Our economy and our standard of living depends on free trade with free democracies. And free trade is dependent on the freedom of the seas.

And who protects the freedom of the seas?

The United States Navy!

If you want to live in an agrarian society where you grow you own food and build your own house without modern appliances, travel opportunities (beyond where a horse and buggy will get you), electronics, etc., there are some places left on the globe where you could live (providing someone else with better weapons than you doesn't decide they like the place, too.)
Vin53 · M
@beckyromero We're not the World's police, sovereign nations have their own responsibility to protect their own interests wherever they feel their need to. We cannot be judge jury and executioner of the high seas.
beckyromero · 36-40, FVIP
@Vin53
We cannot be judge jury and executioner of the high seas.

Of course we can!

You are either FOR freedom of the seas or you are AGAINST it.
Vin53 · M
@beckyromero No, we absolutely cannot. Maritime laws don't allow for it for one thing. For another, if Taiwan and Viet Nam have a dispute over sovereign waters they need to be the ones to work it out not us.
beckyromero · 36-40, FVIP
@Vin53

And who is going to enforce martime laws?
Vin53 · M
@beckyromero The UN, NATO etc. We have International Courts to decide maritime matters, we don't have the right to take it upon our country to decide national disputes across the globe. We're the nation of laws after all.
beckyromero · 36-40, FVIP
@Vin53
The UN, NATO etc. We have International Courts to decide maritime matters, we don't have the right to take it upon our country to decide national disputes across the globe. We're the nation of laws after all.

The UN?

Article 51
Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.


NATO?

Article 5

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.


The International Criminal Court ?

We're not a signatory.

For that matter, neither is China, Iran, North Korea or Russia.
Vin53 · M
@beckyromero If we have naval disputes with any of those 4 countries then hostilities will include the entire breadth of war.