History's Worst Presidential Candidate

"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message
...

Not only that, it's bull**** because we haven't had a battleship, with
or without 16" guns, for quite some time.


Not in service, but I believe two remain on the naval register.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

:
:"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message
.. .
:
: Not only that, it's bull**** because we haven't had a battleship, with
: or without 16" guns, for quite some time.
:
:Not in service, but I believe two remain on the naval register.

Where they are not going anywhere and not shelling anyone.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn

"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message
...
:
: Not only that, it's bull**** because we haven't had a battleship, with
: or without 16" guns, for quite some time.
:
:
:Not in service, but I believe two remain on the naval register.
:

Where they are not going anywhere and not shelling anyone.


But we do have them, and they do have 16" guns.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

:"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message
.. .
: :
: : Not only that, it's bull**** because we haven't had a battleship, with
: : or without 16" guns, for quite some time.
: :
: :Not in service, but I believe two remain on the naval register.
:
: Where they are not going anywhere and not shelling anyone.
:
:But we do have them, and they do have 16" guns.

For some extremely loose definition of 'have'. By this definition, we
still 'have' 32-gun sailing vessels.

For a definition of 'have' that is actually applicable to the original
discussion to hand, we haven't had such a ship for a good decade.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn

"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message
...
:
:But we do have them, and they do have 16" guns.
:

For some extremely loose definition of 'have'. By this definition, we
still 'have' 32-gun sailing vessels.

For a definition of 'have' that is actually applicable to the original
discussion to hand, we haven't had such a ship for a good decade.


Do you consider the Wisconsin and Constitution to be equivalent? They're
both still US Navy ships, and they can both be toured. You can tour the
lower decks of the Constitution, but you can only stroll topside on the
Wisconsin. That's because USS Wisconsin is in storage, the lower decks are
full of preservatives and dehumidifiers. USS Wisconsin could return to
active Navy service, USS Constitution cannot.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

:"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message
.. .
: :
: :But we do have them, and they do have 16" guns.
: :
:
: For some extremely loose definition of 'have'. By this definition, we
: still 'have' 32-gun sailing vessels.
:
: For a definition of 'have' that is actually applicable to the original
: discussion to hand, we haven't had such a ship for a good decade.
:
o you consider the Wisconsin and Constitution to be equivalent?

Today, you bet I do.

:They're
:both still US Navy ships, and they can both be toured. You can tour the
:lower decks of the Constitution, but you can only stroll topside on the
:Wisconsin. That's because USS Wisconsin is in storage, the lower decks are
:full of preservatives and dehumidifiers.

:USS Wisconsin could return to
:active Navy service, USS Constitution cannot.

And when it does that, then folks can talk about us 'having' a
battleship. Until then, we don't.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn