Slashdot: News for Nerds


Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

USS Ronald Reagan Commissioning Tomorrow

michael posted about 11 years ago | from the no-memory-of-those-events dept.

United States 1831

wessman writes "Being an employee at Northrop Grumman's Newport News shipyard, I cannot help but be proud to see one of our products commissioned by the U.S. Navy, especially considering how long it takes to build a $5 billion Nimitz-class nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. And I'm sure the other 18,000 workers here feel the same way. The ship is being commissioned Saturday, July 12 at the Norfolk naval base. It is obviously the most technically advanced carrier in the fleet, taking the term "hardware" to new levels. Pick a local story. From the Hampton Roads Daily Press: Anchors Aweigh, Changes Abound Aboard Carrier, Some Wanted CVN-76 Named after Daredevil Flier, 20,000 Expected for Reagan's Rite, USS Constellation Retiring Too Soon?. From the Virginia Pilot: The Carrier Reagan - Ahead of Its Class, Carrier Construction is All in the Family, Former President's Son Michael Reagan Excited about Commissioning."

cancel ×


I wonder (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415141)

I wonder who is going to be skipper for the USS Gipper.

Re:I wonder (3, Informative)

Mother Gibber (48207) | about 11 years ago | (#6415315)

From the Daily Press: The Reagan's skipper, Capt. John W. "Bill" Goodwin, looked at the model and suggested some changes. The program allowed the shipyard to save millions of dollars by catching problems earlier in the process, Gunter said.

WTF? (-1, Flamebait)

Wakko Warner (324) | about 11 years ago | (#6415142)

I'll never figure out this country's tawdry fascination with celebrity. Reagan was a great actor, but one of the lousiest presidents of all time.

So, what's the deal? Why are we honoring a man who destroyed America by naming the most expensive carrier ever built after him?

- A.P.

Re:WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415152)

I suppose that's your opinion. I know plenty of NON-DEMOCRATS that feel that he was one of the best.

Re:WTF? (1)

Wakko Warner (324) | about 11 years ago | (#6415161)

I'm not a Democrat, myself. I think both parties need to get with the program.

- A.P.

Re:WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415164)

Why are we honoring a man who destroyed America

You mean the U.S.S. Jimmy Carter?

Mod Parent Troll Down (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415168)

I thought trolls were modded down on this site.

Re:Mod Parent Troll Down (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415210)

Haven't been here long, have you? :-)

Re:WTF? (4, Insightful)

Planesdragon (210349) | about 11 years ago | (#6415176)

So, what's the deal? Why are we honoring a man who destroyed America by naming the most expensive carrier ever built after him?

He was a president, and whatever his domestic failings, he does get the credit for ending the Cold War without WWIII.

Plus, I suspect that the darn things are just named after the president when they were first proposed.

Re:WTF? (1)

dangerweasel (576874) | about 11 years ago | (#6415231)

I though Bush I took credit for this. How can two men claim it. Ohhh, that right, they are Republicans.

Re:WTF? (1, Flamebait)

Aadain2001 (684036) | about 11 years ago | (#6415299)

First of all, he didn't end the Cold War. Russia defeated themselves with their crappy domestic programs and lacking infastructure. The people had no food, no water, and no heat. It was only a matter of time before they collapsed. All Reagan did was kill MORE civilians by not allowed the Russian government to drop all the military posturing, thus taking even more the little money they had away from the people and putting it into the military (gee, sound a little familiar?). He the the chance to end the war YEARS earlier, without the massive loss of the life that occured because of starvation of freezing, but he had to have his Star Wars program, which the Russian government viewed as a threat (and rightly so). So, in the end, Reagan just prolonged the conflict, caused more civilians to die, and increased our debt. This is why I agree with the parent that he was one of the worst presidents ever. But I'm one of the few INFORMED citizens it seems, so I'm in the minority on that view. Sad this is is that Bush had learned from Reagan, and his daddy, and is trying very hard to repeat the dog and poney show. So far, it's been working since the population doesn't want to be informed for fear of learning that they are wrong.

Re:WTF? (1, Flamebait)

GMontag (42283) | about 11 years ago | (#6415186)

Still upset about that defeat of Communism? Time to move on.

Re:WTF? (2, Interesting)

Wakko Warner (324) | about 11 years ago | (#6415300)

What defeat? Russian "communism" collapsed of its own accord. Reagan was just around when it happened (so was I; should I get some credit too?)

- A.P.

Makes sense, really (1, Funny)

jvalenzu (96614) | about 11 years ago | (#6415188)

Some of the (few) people who benefited from his destruction of the constitution, the defense industry, have decided to honor him. Expect to see his face on the $1,000,000 dollar bill when they make one so his other pals can have a wallet picture.

Re:WTF? (0, Flamebait)

dangerweasel (576874) | about 11 years ago | (#6415204)

Don;t you find it apropos to build the most expensive aircraft carrier ever, and name it after the man who drove us the furthest into the hole? Although Bush may try and top that.

Re:WTF? (4, Funny)

Aadain2001 (684036) | about 11 years ago | (#6415217)

Why are we honoring a man who destroyed America by naming the most expensive carrier ever built after him?
I think it's kind of fitting to name the most expensive carrier ever built after the man who increased our national debt more than all the previous presidents combined.

Re:WTF? (2, Informative)

CommieLib (468883) | about 11 years ago | (#6415283)

the man who increased our national debt more blah...blah...blah..

Ugh. This stuff drives me crazy.

Crack a book. Congress does the budget. Maybe the phrase "Congressional Budget" rings a bell?

Re:WTF? (1)

Demodian (658895) | about 11 years ago | (#6415224)

I suppose it is of no consolation to point out that new Clinton and Lewinsky Cuban Cigar and Sex Toy Factory Outlet just opened up outside of Havana last month after years of licensing the naming rights...

Re:WTF? (3, Funny)

s20451 (410424) | about 11 years ago | (#6415235)

'cause it's much more likely to strike fear into the hearts of America's enemies than the USS Jimmy Carter (motto: Malaise Forever).

Re:WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415330)

'cause it's much more likely to strike fear into the hearts of America's enemies than the USS Jimmy Carter (motto: Malaise Forever).

There already is a USS Jimmy Carter. It's a submarine. While many presidents have served in the armed forces, Carter is the only one to have served on a submarine.

The story is that the USS Jimmy Carter is specialized in tapping undersea telecom/fiber optic cables.

re: WTF? (1)

ed.han (444783) | about 11 years ago | (#6415245)

"reagan was a great actor, but one of the lousiest presidents of all time."

this statement is a subjective determination, not a statement of fact. among conservatives, reagan is often lauded as the greatest president the US has ever had. now, whether or not that's T/F is irrelevant. besides, nimitz-class naming conventions dictate that you name the ships after former presidents.

considering the build-up of the military during his 2 administrations--really, a kind of glory day period for the pentagon--naming the newest nimitz after him was inevitable, IMHO.


Re:WTF? (1)

aasania (613612) | about 11 years ago | (#6415249)

>So, what's the deal? Why are we honoring a man who destroyed America by naming the most expensive carrier ever built after him?

Probably because he dreamed up "Star Wars," the most expensive missile defense system not-yet-built. What's more appropriate then that?

Re:WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415316)

Excellent Reasoning!

Just because something does not work NOW, let's stop the research!

No AIDS vaccine now so let's stop the research

No cure for cancer now, so let's stop the research

you idiot.

Re:WTF? (1)

jhampson (580482) | about 11 years ago | (#6415267)

So, what's the deal? Why are we honoring a man who destroyed America by naming the most expensive carrier ever built after him?
Wow, the USS Abraham Lincoln was pretty advanced for it's time...

Re:WTF? (3, Insightful)

Getzen (549982) | about 11 years ago | (#6415289)

The only things Reagan destroyed were Democrats, high taxes, lack of confidence in America, the Berlin Wall, and the Soviet Empire. The guy's face deserves to be on Mount Rushmore.

In the meantime, his name on the most advanced aircraft carrier on the planet will do nicely.

Why not name the Carrier after President Reagan? (1)

LoneStarGeek (626553) | about 11 years ago | (#6415314)

Why not name this carrier after two-time elected President Ronald Reagan? They have named many Carriers in the past after former US Presidents such as JFK, Roosevelt and so on. I even assume one day they will name some after Carter and Clinton even though they did their best to neuter our military power forever. At least Reagan saw fit for us to have a strong military/technology research throughout the 80's when we needed it the most during the Soviets greatest military build-up. Whether you agree with his political policy or not, you have to agree he was an influential President that accomplished many things in his two terms as President of the United States.


JismTroll (588456) | about 11 years ago | (#6415145)


Since posters are mostly experts on the subject, I decided to ask one of civilization's ancient mysteries to the pioneering minds in the world of deviant homosexuality: Slashdot users.


Which do you think is homosexual to a lesser degree, recieving a blowjob from a man or being fucked in the ass by a woman with a strapon?

Definately the Latter.. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415171)

This is Slashdot, so, instead of a woman, what about a blow up doll with a strap on?

But will it remember the day after? (0, Offtopic)

blane.bramble (133160) | about 11 years ago | (#6415149)

Some text here. Really.

Re:But will it remember the day after? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415284)

you sick heartless fuck- you will burn for that one

One question. (2, Funny)

teamhasnoi (554944) | about 11 years ago | (#6415155)

Does the ship forget where it is?

Re:One question. (-1, Insightful)

TomSawyer (100674) | about 11 years ago | (#6415221)

h0 h0 h0!! that's so funny...

Get it?! The ship is named after Ronald Reagan and he has alzheimers so he has memory loss.

h0h0h0, alzheimers is so funny, nobody I love is suffering from it so it's sooo funny. h0 h0 h0


Re:One question. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415248)

he was refering to the watergate scandal

Re:One question. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415268)

Ronald Reagan not Richard Nixon, or is you with altzheimers?

Re:One question. (2, Insightful)

CharlieG (34950) | about 11 years ago | (#6415291)

He was refering to Iran Contra

If your going to call someone a dumbass, I sugest you get your facts right. Then again, based on the average age of the posters here, you probably don't remember Iran Contra, never mind Watergate (which was Nixon FYI). And yes, I remember both

Re:One question. (3, Informative)

gowen (141411) | about 11 years ago | (#6415270)

The ship is named after Ronald Reagan and he has alzheimers so he has memory loss.
Reagan's memory loss occured long before he suffered from Alzheimers. I suggest you read his testimony to the Iran-Contra affair, in which he (somewhat conveniently) "failed to recall" how much he knew about the deal. He also "forgot" many other facets of it, such as his requirement to inform Congress...

Oversensitive (2, Insightful)

bareman (60518) | about 11 years ago | (#6415334)

You can call him jackass and in turn you may be called oversensistive.

Regardless the tragedy that alzheimers is, and it most definitely is... The joke is still funny.

lighten up.

Re:One question. (0, Troll)

TopShelf (92521) | about 11 years ago | (#6415234)

Does the ship forget where it is?

Only after engaging in super-secret don't-tell-Congress enemy government-destabilizing activities. Obviously, it's the epitome of politico-military technology...

Re:One question. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415255)

You swine. You vulgar little maggot. Don't you know that you are pathetic? You worthless bag of filth. As we say in Texas, I'll bet you couldn't pour piss out of a boot with instructions on the heel. You are a canker. A sore that won't go away. I would rather kiss a lawyer than be seen with you.

You are a fiend and a coward, and you have bad breath. You are degenerate, noxious and depraved. I feel debased just for knowing you exist. I despise everything about you. You are a bloody nardless newbie twit protohominid chromosomally aberrant caricature of a coprophagic cloacal parasitic pond scum and I wish you would go away.

You're a putrescence mass, a walking vomit. You are a spineless little worm deserving nothing but the profoundest contempt. You are a jerk, a cad, a weasel. Your life is a monument to stupidity. You are a stench, a revulsion, a big suck on a sour lemon.

You are a bleating fool, a curdled staggering mutant dwarf smeared richly with the effluvia and offal accompanying your alleged birth into this world. An insensate, blinking calf, meaningful to nobody, abandoned by the puke-drooling, giggling beasts who sired you and then killed themselves in recognition of what they had done.

I will never get over the embarrassment of belonging to the same species as you. You are a monster, an ogre, a malformity. I barf at the very thought of you. You have all the appeal of a paper cut. Lepers avoid you. You are vile, worthless, less than nothing. You are a weed, a fungus, the dregs of this earth. And did I mention you smell?

If you aren't an idiot, you made a world-class effort at simulating one. Try to edit your writing of unnecessary material before attempting to impress us with your insight. The evidence that you are a nincompoop will still be available to readers, but they will be able to access it more rapidly.

You snail-skulled little rabbit. Would that a hawk pick you up, drive its beak into your brain, and upon finding it rancid set you loose to fly briefly before spattering the ocean rocks with the frothy pink shame of your ignoble blood. May you choke on the queasy, convulsing nausea of your own trite, foolish beliefs.

You are weary, stale, flat and unprofitable. You are grimy, squalid, nasty and profane. You are foul and disgusting. You're a fool, an ignoramus. Monkeys look down on you. Even sheep won't have sex with you. You are unreservedly pathetic, starved for attention, and lost in a land that reality forgot.

And what meaning do you expect your delusionally self-important statements of unknowing, inexperienced opinion to have with us? What fantasy do you hold that you would believe that your tiny-fisted tantrums would have more weight than that of a leprous desert rat, spinning rabidly in a circle, waiting for the bite of the snake?

You are a waste of flesh. You have no rhythm. You are ridiculous and obnoxious. You are the moral equivalent of a leech. You are a living emptiness, a meaningless void. You are sour and senile. You are a disease, you puerile one-handed slack-jawed drooling meatslapper.

On a good day you're a half-wit. You remind me of drool. You are deficient in all that lends character. You have the personality of wallpaper. You are dank and filthy. You are asinine and benighted. You are the source of all unpleasantness. You spread misery and sorrow wherever you go.

I cannot believe how incredibly stupid you are. I mean rock-hard stupid. Dehydrated-rock-hard stupid. Stupid so stupid that it goes way beyond the stupid we know into a whole different dimension of stupid. You are trans-stupid stupid. Meta-stupid. Stupid collapsed on itself so far that even the neutrons have collapsed. Stupid gotten so dense that no intellect can escape. Singularity stupid. Blazing hot mid-day sun on Mercury stupid. You emit more stupid in one second than our entire galaxy emits in a year. Quasar stupid. Your writing has to be a troll. Nothing in our universe can really be this stupid. Perhaps this is some primordial fragment from the original big bang of stupid. Some pure essence of a stupid so uncontaminated by anything else as to be beyond the laws of physics that we know. I'm sorry. I can't go on. This is an epiphany of stupid for me. After this, you may not hear from me again for a while. I don't have enough strength left to deride your ignorant questions and half baked comments about unimportant trivia, or any of the rest of this drivel. Duh.

The only thing worse than your logic is your manners. I have snipped away most of what you wrote, because, well... it didn't really say anything. Your attempt at constructing a creative flame was pitiful. I mean, really, stringing together a bunch of insults among a load of babbling was hardly effective... Maybe later in life, after you have learned to read, write, spell, and count, you will have more success. True, these are rudimentary skills that many of us "normal" people take for granted that everyone has an easy time of mastering. But we sometimes forget that there are "challenged" persons in this world who find these things more difficult. If I had known, that this was your case then I would have never read your post. It just wouldn't have been "right". Sort of like parking in a handicap space. I wish you the best of luck in the emotional, and social struggles that seem to be placing such a demand on you.

P.S.: You are hypocritical, greedy, violent, malevolent, vengeful, cowardly, deadly, mendacious, meretricious, loathsome, despicable, belligerent, opportunistic, barratrous, contemptible, criminal, fascistic, bigoted, racist, sexist, avaricious, tasteless, idiotic, brain-damaged, imbecilic, insane, arrogant, deceitful, demented, lame, self-righteous, byzantine, conspiratorial, satanic, fraudulent, libelous, bilious, splenetic, spastic, ignorant, clueless, illegitimate, harmful, destructive, dumb, evasive, double-talking, devious, revisionist, narrow, manipulative, paternalistic, fundamentalist, dogmatic, idolatrous, unethical, cultic, diseased, suppressive, controlling, restrictive, malignant, deceptive, dim, crazy, weird, dystopic, stifling, uncaring, plantigrade, grim, unsympathetic, jargon-spouting, censorious, secretive, aggressive, mind-numbing, arassive, poisonous, flagrant, self-destructive, abusive, socially-retarded, puerile, clueless, and generally Not Good.

Nope (4, Funny)

MAXOMENOS (9802) | about 11 years ago | (#6415258)

It may, however, very well send weapons to Iran.

Sorry, when's the launch? (-1, Troll)

goldcd (587052) | about 11 years ago | (#6415159)

What aircraft carrier?
Anyone seen Bonzo?

What good the best hardware? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415163)

There already exist the best defence systems, logistics and hardware all over. With the world already a global village, pretty little can be achieved with great hardware alone.

Will this reduce the threat level colors?

Hope it doesn't run Windoze (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415165)

The Navy should remember what happened last time they let a sucky consumer-grade "O"S on board.

Re:Hope it doesn't run Windoze (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415304)

Yet another Anti-MS faggot....

Way too many articles (2, Interesting)

WTFmonkey (652603) | about 11 years ago | (#6415167)

For me to read. At any rate, these are some awe-inspiring machines (Nimitz-class ships were #3 (IIRC) on TLC's Top 10 Military Machines of all time earlier this week). This makes 10, right?


JismTroll (588456) | about 11 years ago | (#6415173)

Gerald Ford (4, Funny)

Jack Comics (631233) | about 11 years ago | (#6415175)

Whew, at least it's not the U.S.S. Gerald Ford, or the U.S. Navy would be in big trouble. I mean, Gerald Ford tumbling while getting out of a helicopter is one thing, but I can only imagine what kind of manuever problems the U.S.S. Gerald Ford would have. It could potentially destroy half a sea port while attempting to dock.

OT(slightly): What is the history of the name (1)

rikkards (98006) | about 11 years ago | (#6415177)

I mean Newport News not Reagan. I have wondered about this for a while

Cue... (2, Insightful)

BTWR (540147) | about 11 years ago | (#6415179)

Cue Anti-American debate...

Here we go again. Why is it that ANY time anything tangentially related to a republican, american, "threat to humanity" or anything else from the USA appears on /. there is an inevitable anti-American flamewar?

Re:Cue... (1)

orpheus2000 (166384) | about 11 years ago | (#6415220)

Nah, there's bigger fish to fry; like making fun of Reagan's Alzheimer's condition or other presidential and vice-presidential blunders.

Re:Cue... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415232)

Because you, specifically, have asked for one?

It would probbly be a good idea to get into a defensive posture when you *have* been attacked.

Re:Cue... (1)

ibpooks (127372) | about 11 years ago | (#6415242)

Because slashdot is populated by a bunch of bong-smoking, tree-hugging, birkenstock-wearing, frisbee-playing, VW bus-driving, patchouli-breathed, greasy-haired, folk-singing, protest-following, acid-tripping, nasty female armpit-haired, awful-smelling, stupid pacifist hippies!

Re:Cue... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415260)

Wow, I didn't know your parents were here!

Re:Cue... (1)

Pxtl (151020) | about 11 years ago | (#6415295)

Well, in this case, even reasonable Americans can have a problem with Reagan. The man ran the country into the shitter, and got off scot-free. Naming a carrier after him would be like naming a courthouse after Nixon.

Re:Cue... (1)

ibpooks (127372) | about 11 years ago | (#6415302)

oops, I forgot communist.

Bah. (4, Funny)

Surak (18578) | about 11 years ago | (#6415184)

It'll just lose all the data stored in its memory systems after every mission. Particularly secret CIA ones.

The USS Jimmy Carter would kick it's ass. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415189)

If they hadn't stolen the debate notes.

The USS Jimmy Carter would kick no one's ass (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415311)

It would just sail around for months at a time with no purpose. After it was decomissioned, it would go build houses for the poor.

USS Bill Clinton (0)

Webtommy88 (515386) | about 11 years ago | (#6415193)

Why the heck does Reagen get a Carrier named after him? What's next USS Bill Clinton!??

Why couldn't they just stick to US States.

Re:USS Bill Clinton (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415246)

Battleships are usually named after states, not carriers. Although we don't have anymore battleships so I guess they could do it.

Re:USS Bill Clinton (1)

JZ_Tonka (570336) | about 11 years ago | (#6415278)

"What's next USS Bill Clinton!??"

From the article: "The Reagan may not even be the jump that's expected with the George H.W. Bush, the carrier that the yard is now ramping up production on. The Bush, also known as CVN-77, is set for completion in 2008 and is expected to be the last of the Nimitz-class ships."

And just a side comment, I would think that a large part of the Clinton administration involved castrating the military (including multiple attempts to kill the CVN-76 project), I wouldn't expect his efforts to be rewarded with a warship.

News for nerds? Stuff that matters? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415194)

Who cares?

Re:News for nerds? Stuff that matters? (2, Insightful)

hesiod (111176) | about 11 years ago | (#6415262)

Not me

should come in handy (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415195)

The United States claims to be a nation of peace lovers
and it has been at peace since the end of the Second World War, except, that is, for their attacks on

China (1945-46);
Korea (1950-53);
Guatemala (1954, 1967-69);
Cuba (1959-60);
Belgian Congo (1964);
Vietnam (1961-73);
Cambodia (1969-70);
Grenada (1983);
Libya (1986);
El Salvador (1980-92);
Nicaragua (1981-90);
Panama (1989);
Iraq (1991);
Bosnia (1995);
Sudan (1998);
Yugoslavia (1999);
Afghanistan (2001-02);
Iraq (2003 - ongoing);

Plus "police action" in Colombia regarding drugs (ongoing),
an insurrection in Chile (1973),
and numerous other covert bombings conducted by, or under the direction of, the CIA.

From 1945 to the end of the 20th century, the U.S. attempted to overthrow more
than 40 foreign governments and to crush more than 30 populist movements
fighting against insufferable regimes.
In the process, they have bombed about 25 countries,
killed several million people, and condemned many millions more to lives of agony, poverty and despair, not bad for a nation of "peace lovers"

Re:should come in handy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415318)

How is this "interesting"? Clearly a troll - the list is so biased that I'm surprised it doesn't slide off my screen under its own weight.

Somebody mod it down. e_e

America didn't "attack" Bosnia (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415321)

You've obviously haven't kept up with Srebrenica [] , eh?

How appropriate... (3, Informative)

sting3r (519844) | about 11 years ago | (#6415198)

...that a $5 billion aircraft carrier that we really don't need during this time of budget crunches and economic weakness bears the name of the man who invented modern deficit spending in America.

Ronald Reagan's pro-spending, pro-big-government, anti-labor policies are undoubtedly going to lead my beloved country to her death. But with our large military, at least we will make a hell of a lot of noise when everything finally collapses.

Re:How appropriate... (2, Troll)

BigBir3d (454486) | about 11 years ago | (#6415326)

bears the name of the man who invented modern deficit spending in America.

That would be JFK, not Reagan. We can thank JFK for the mess that was the Vietnam conflict, as well as the mess that is NASA. Neither of those endeavors were cheap. What a great leader he was...

Reagan was pro-defense (USSR hadn't fallen yet) but not really pro-big-goverment. His anti-labor policies must have been why he had more Democrats voting for him than any Republican ever.

1. Think
2. Post
3. ???
4. Profit!!!

from the no-memory-of-those-events dept (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415199)

Considering his current condition, he has no memory of what he ate for breakfast let alone Iran Contra.

Grumman: Company with some motivation (1)

dlosey (688472) | about 11 years ago | (#6415201)

18,000 Employees? You guys wouldn't happen to be using Sony Laptops would you? Coincidence... I think not!

Bad Name (5, Funny)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 11 years ago | (#6415202)

Does that make it the U.S.S.R. Regan? :)

U-S-A! U-S-A! (-1, Flamebait)

Rogerborg (306625) | about 11 years ago | (#6415203)

Sure, we haven't tackled illiteracy, child poverty, acid rain, inequality of opportunity, inner city ghettoes, organized crime, global warming, space exploration, the garbage crisis, smog, cancer, AIDS, rainforest clearing, renewable energy or affordable social security, but looky here! Our zillion dollar aircraft carriers now come with a screensaver!

Re:U-S-A! U-S-A! (0)

Jack Comics (631233) | about 11 years ago | (#6415288)

Funny. I don't see many other countries tackling those either, but I do see many countries depending on the U.S.'s military might for world security for the past half century, including much of Europe.

Honestly, if a country tries to be a jack of all trades, it will eventually spread itself too thin and be good at nothing. For a world community and economy that we're leading to, the world might be better off having nations specializing in one thing or another, and let the U.S. specialize on what it does best... its military. Let other countries handle solving global warming, cancer, AIDS, and what have you. Not to say that other countries can't contribute, but trying to be the best at everything runs the risk of being good at nothing.

Star Wars (1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415205)

Ah yes .... in the time you read this posting, a thousand children died from not having clean water. Think about where we are spending our money!

Re:Star Wars (0)

Ktulu_03 (668300) | about 11 years ago | (#6415293)

And why is it our responsibility to spend every penny we have solving the rest of the world's problems? I thought other countries wanted us to stay out of their part of the world.

Ouch.. (3, Funny)

grub (11606) | about 11 years ago | (#6415209)

At $5 billion a pop, I can only imagine what a Beowulf cluster of these would be like..

great... (3, Funny)

painehope (580569) | about 11 years ago | (#6415212)

let me guess, Microsoft designed the onboard software, and it lives up to it's namesake :
the GPS forgets where it is, and the sensory equipment goes to sleep during long meetings.

Re:great... (1, Funny)

hesiod (111176) | about 11 years ago | (#6415294)

> let me guess, Microsoft designed the onboard software,

AAAAAH, so that's why it cost $5 billion.

Full circle (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415214)

Remember when Reagan confused a movie role with real life war experience. Now his name is realling the navy.

Great! (0, Flamebait)

Varitek (210013) | about 11 years ago | (#6415219)

Ever more expensive ways of
a) Killing people
b) Rewarding the military-industrial complex for their campaign donations.

News for nerds, stuff that matters? I hope not.

Cool beans. (2, Insightful)

FroMan (111520) | about 11 years ago | (#6415225)

Now we get to see all the normal slashbots complain that we should be spending money on something else cause war is so 20th century and we now live in an age of peace and love.

Personally, I think its great that we continue to push the edge of technology in warfare. It allows us to keep wars down to as short a time as possible. And, the shorter the duration of wars, the less people killed by them. The better the tech, ideally the fewer civilian deaths also.

Re:Cool beans. (1)

mccalli (323026) | about 11 years ago | (#6415305)

the shorter the duration of wars, the less people killed by them.

Not really, no.

The Hundred Years War, whilst not actually lasting a hundred years, did last rather longer than World War II. However, the number of people dying was somewhat less.


What a fitting tribute... (0, Flamebait)

Fideaux! (44069) | about 11 years ago | (#6415228)

...To Ronald Reagan than a FIVE FRICKING BILLION DOLLAR aircraft carrier. This will certainly help us maintain our naval superiority over the Spanish Armada.

Cripes, my grandchildren will still be paying interest on the man's wastefull stupidity, and probably be wondering why that damn missile defense thing still doesn't work.

Re:What a fitting tribute... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415280)

Oh please, you have no idea what you are talking about. Ronald Regan brought about one of the longest peacetime expansions of the economy ever.

Great Article (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415230)

Now its time to send the warship I paid for over to kill thousands of Middle Eastern children.

Let the young blood flow, baby!

Fire on Babylon!

hmm... (1)

amishgeek (611733) | about 11 years ago | (#6415240)

is obviously the most technically advanced carrier in the fleet

Most technically advanced eh? Do they cheat on performance tests like apple does?

Misnamed, I think (4, Funny)

mblase (200735) | about 11 years ago | (#6415241)

The list from "Changes Abound Aboard Carrier [] " includes:

* More space for women
* New island house
* Bulbous bow
* New arresting gear

One can't help but think it should have been named the USS Bill Clinton instead....

Control systems (1)

agentZ (210674) | about 11 years ago | (#6415244)

We all laughed (or cried, depending) upon reading about the Navy vessel that had to be towed back to port when its WindowsNT command system failed. All of the articles mention that parts for this ship were delayed so that they could have the latest and greatest control technology. What is it? Does this thing run XP Service Pack 1? Linux? Something else?

Wait.. is he even dead? (1)

JayPee (4090) | about 11 years ago | (#6415253)

I thought the military didn't usually name ships after people until they were dead?

Apparently this is a relatively new "tradition". m

What we really need (1)

aardwolf204 (630780) | about 11 years ago | (#6415254)

What we really need is a Submarine - Aircraft Carrier hybrid.

Yipes! (0)

darth_MALL (657218) | about 11 years ago | (#6415257)

This is from one of the articles re: the next generation carriers after Nimitz - a new reactor able to power electromagnetic catapults and directed-energy weapons. Fancy ((8^(|)

lol (1)

tevenson (625386) | about 11 years ago | (#6415266)

They installed an eight year old fiber opitical system called ICAN. Hahaha. I bet my works 100 megabit network is more reliable than this shit will be.

Screenshots of Nimitzes (3, Informative)

SpaceRook (630389) | about 11 years ago | (#6415275)

Here is a hell of a lot of images of these things:

Pictures []

Another war machine... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415277)

...made by the dogs of war. I am sad science and engineering has gone so far has it has today. Go on america... beat your chests to the jingoistic rhythm.

tool..... (1)

twentyamptwist (688699) | about 11 years ago | (#6415282)

How fitting that such a tool of massive destruction is named "Ronald Reagan" Maybe it will forget where it is going and get lost somewhere in the Arctic.

Your Tax Dollars at Work (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 11 years ago | (#6415285)

What a collossal waste of money. $5 billion? Hello with that amount, there are so many more domestic & social problems that could be solved with that money. Instead they piss it away on something to defend a country that is decaying from the inside out due to things like lack of social funding.

Be Careful Mr.Government, eventually there might not be anything left worth defending.

And this is news...why? (1, Troll)

Apostata (390629) | about 11 years ago | (#6415290)

News for Nerds. Stuff that matters. Buy war bonds.

Not dead yet (5, Interesting)

hawkfish (8978) | about 11 years ago | (#6415319)

How come so many things are being named after this guy when he's not even dead yet? It used to be that you had to be dead to get public objects named after you. But for some odd reason, RWR is getting airports, federal buildings and warships named after him without the traditional respectful pause. This pause was there to prevent overly partisan hysteria from hijacking the public name space. And of course, Conservatives (who ought to know better) are the principal forces behind this flushing of tradition.

In Reagan's case, he is not really a factor, but his partisans (and detractors) are still pretty rabid. If he is really a great as his adherents say he is, why not wait a bit longer until a consensus emerges?

Better than an airport... (1, Troll)

ca1v1n (135902) | about 11 years ago | (#6415320)

They're naming an aircraft carrier after a guy who oversaw one of the largest peacetime military expansions in history. At least that's better than naming an airport after a guy who fired half the nation's air traffic controllers.

Put a submarine up against it any day (3, Interesting)

bubblegoose (473320) | about 11 years ago | (#6415327)

From the Pilot Online article Though they tout the Reagan as far more powerful than any threat it might face, Navy leaders insist that the massive cost of an even more powerful ship is easily justified.

They better make sure they commision at least two submarines to escort this thing. The only ship capable of really fighting a submarine is another submarine. The suface ship guys may say they can handle this role, but they can't. If this thing isn't escorted by at least two 688s it will never hear the modern diesel boat running on batteries that launches 4 torpodoes on it.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account