View Single Post
  #6  
Old November 7th 03, 04:44 PM
Alan Minyard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 17:16:12 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

In article , "tadaa" wrote:

Well it seems that USA with it's navy is quite capable of getting
into trouble . Quite frankly i don't see a point of maintaining a
strong navy if you are preparing to fight off horde of tanks. How
large navy should Austria have? Or Swiss? Or from those countries
that have shoreline Finland or Sweden? Those large ships would just
have been targets in the Baltic. The point is that USA needs to have
a navy to be able to project force, but the Europeans were preparing
for a war in Europe so they didn't need that strong navy.


Like the "strong navy" they didn't need in 1939?

Too much of the world's resources *have* to be moved by sea, and if you
have no real deepwater navy, you can end up on the short end of the
stick in short order.


Europe, other than the Nazis, was not preparing for war, they were
preparing to surrender.

Al Minyard