To the U.S. Navy - the USS John P. Murtha is going way too far.

[Mr. Moto]

There has been a distressing trend for some time in the Navy to name some ships after powerful politicians - especially naval patrons. Now, by this I don't mean naming aircraft carriers after George Washington, Theodore Roosevelt or Abraham Lincoln - these are appropriate national memorials for national heroes.

This starts to break down when ships start getting named for John Stennis or Carl Vinson or John Warner. And now it has reached probably the height of absurdity - the Navy has proposed naming an amphibious ship the USS John P. Murtha.

The Navy Times article cited indicates that this may be a controversial choice - I think that may put things a bit delicately. And aside from the pork and the backroom deals that came to define Murtha over the years, the comments over Haditha might be the dealbreaker. Even if Murtha was right, he was impolitic, and the class of ship in question here is designed to carry 700 Marines.

The Navy needs to cut this bullshit right now - and if that means renaming the George H.W. Bush and the Gerald Ford, so be it. Consequential things like ships should be named for consequential people.

Thoughts?

[Squink]

Originally Posted by Mr. Moto

The Navy needs to cut this bullshit right now - and if that means renaming the George H.W. Bush and the Gerald Ford, so be it. Consequential things like ships should be named for consequential people.

Thoughts?

Don't forget Reagan. You forgot Reagan. That should've never happened.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Once they named something after Reagan, all standards were shattered anyway. You might as well name a ship the USS Titty Fuck for all the difference it makes.

[ElvisL1ves]

Originally Posted by Mr. Moto

Even if Murtha was right, he was impolitic

Very arguable, that, and it's hard even to claim he was wrong.

Consequential things like ships should be named for consequential people.

Who would be a better choice?

[Gangster Octopus]

Is that really a major ship? I am honestly asking because I don't know. How many ships are in the Navy? Do we name all of them?

[Mr. Moto]

Actually, ships of that class have all been named after cities or counties, so a better choice would have been not naming it after a person at all.

[black rabbit]

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

You might as well name a ship the USS Titty Fuck for all the difference it makes.

Where do I sign?

[Mr. Moto]

Originally Posted by Gangster Octopus

Is that really a major ship? I am honestly asking because I don't know. How many ships are in the Navy? Do we name all of them?

It is 684 feet long, carries a crew of 365 officers and enlisted plus a landing force of 700 Marines and their equipment.

Pretty major.

[BobLibDem]

The tightie righties were all OK with Murtha and at one time was the Official Democrat We Can Almost Stand. His pronouncements on military policy carried great weight. Then he finally spat out the Iraq koolaid and he instantly became persona non grata among the wingnuts. So The Order Of The Perpetually Twisted Knicker is up in arms because a ship was named after him. Boo freaking hoo.

[Monty]

Personally, I think it's a silly thing to name a ship after a person. FWIW, the first ship on which I served in the Navy was the USS CARL VINSON (CVN 70).

[Cliffy]

I don't think ships should be named after people -- or at least, not people who haven't been dead for thirty years. But if you're going to do it at all, I'm with Dio. Once you name something after Reagan, I will hear no criticism of anything named after any Democrat. (Personally, I'm holding out for the U.S.S. Abbie Hoffman.)

--Cliffy

[Sailboat]

Originally Posted by Mr. Moto

the comments over Haditha might be the dealbreaker

I'm currently in the middle of a five-month intensive course of study of these comments and their implications, so I can see how...

No I'm not. Uh, what are you talking about? Could you throw me a bone here?

[RickJay]

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

Once they named something after Reagan, all standards were shattered anyway.

Reagan was a two term President of the United States. If you're going to name a U.S. Navy ship after a person, it's hard to think of a BETTER choice.

Seriously, John Murtha, whatever you think of his personal politics, is not one of the 500 most important Americans you could name a warship after. He might not be in the top thousand.

[Harmonious Discord]

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

Once they named something after Reagan, all standards were shattered anyway. You might as well name a ship the USS Titty Fuck for all the difference it makes.

Wouldn't sailors prefer being on the USS Titty Fuck over the USS John P. Murtha?

[Chefguy]

Originally Posted by RickJay

Reagan was a two term President of the United States. If you're going to name a U.S. Navy ship after a person, it's hard to think of a BETTER choice.

Seriously, John Murtha, whatever you think of his personal politics, is not one of the 500 most important Americans you could name a warship after. He might not be in the top thousand.

According to the OP, it should only be after national heroes. Reagan doesn't qualify, nor does Murtha.

[Terraplane]

Originally Posted by Mr. Moto

The Navy needs to cut this bullshit right now - and if that means renaming the George H.W. Bush and the Gerald Ford, so be it. Consequential things like ships should be named for consequential people.

Thoughts?

I can agree with this. I don't have any particular dislike of Murtha but I think a person should be dead a long, long time before they get a ship named after them. It gives history a chance to come to a consensus on that person's legacy and will help limit the amount of sailors forced to sail on a ship named after somebody they find controversial. I'd be pissed if I joined the navy and got assigned to the USS Dick Cheney or USS Donald Rumsfeld.

I would, however, be honored to serve aboard the USS Titty Fuck.

[42fish]

Originally Posted by Terraplane

I would, however, be honored to serve aboard the USS Titty Fuck.

I sense a new trend.

Headline in 2025: "US Navy dispatches Titty Fuck, Dirty Sanchez to Persian Gulf"

[Kyla]

Originally Posted by Sailboat

I'm currently in the middle of a five-month intensive course of study of these comments and their implications, so I can see how...

No I'm not. Uh, what are you talking about? Could you throw me a bone here?

Wikipedia explains all. Apparently Murtha accused some Marines of killing Afghan civilians in cold blood before an investigation into their actions was carried out.

Charges have been dropped on all but one of the Marines involved.

[Kimstu]

I think the OP is exaggerating the break with tradition that this represents. As the Navy itself points out,

As with many other things, the procedures and practices involved in Navy ship naming are as much, if not more, products of evolution and tradition than of legislation. As we have seen, the names for new ships are personally decided by the Secretary of the Navy. The Secretary can rely on many sources to help him reach his decisions. Each year, the Naval Historical Center compiles primary and alternate ship name recommendations and forwards these to the Chief of Naval Operations by way of the chain of command. These recommendations are the result of research into the history of the Navy and by suggestions submitted by service members, Navy veterans, and the public. Ship name source records at the Historical Center reflect the wide variety of name sources that have been used in the past, particularly since World War I. Ship name recommendations are conditioned by such factors as the name categories for ship types now being built, as approved by the Secretary of the Navy; the distribution of geographic names of ships of the Fleet; names borne by previous ships which distinguished themselves in service; names recommended by individuals and groups; and names of naval leaders, national figures, and deceased members of the Navy and Marine Corps who have been honored for heroism in war or for extraordinary achievement in peace. [...]

Into the mid-1970s attack submarines continued to be named for sea creatures, though a few were named for such legislators as Richard B. Russell and L. Mendel Rivers. Ships of the more recent Los Angeles class bear the names of American cities. One exception, Hyman G. Rickover, honors the man who has been called "the father of the nuclear Navy." The new Seawolf class has departed from this scheme, with Seawolf representing a "denizen of the deep" and Connecticut named for the state; the third ship of the class has not yet been named.

If an attack submarine could be named after L. Mendel Rivers in the 1970's, I don't see it as any kind of a stretch whatsoever to name an amphibious transport dock after Murtha today.

[Kiber]

Here are some other US Navy ships named after people. How many of these meet the Ops criteria?

A1C William H. Pitsenbarger
Abraham Lincoln
Admiral W.M. Callaghan
Alan Shepard
Albert David
Albert J. Myer
Alexander Hamilton
Alfred A. Cunningham
Allen M. Sumner
Amelia Earhart
Andrew J. Higgins
Andrew Jackson
Arleigh Burke
Arnold J. Isbell
Arthur L. Bristol
Arthur W. Radford
Aubrey Fitch

OK - those are just the ones beginning with "A" - but you get the idea.

[ElvisL1ves]

Originally Posted by 42fish

I sense a new trend.

Headline in 2025: "US Navy dispatches Titty Fuck, Dirty Sanchez to Persian Gulf"

Gotta be a way to fit "USS Teabagger" in there somewhere. Or "USS Cleveland Steams to Venezuela".

[Mr. Moto]

Originally Posted by Kimstu

I think the OP is exaggerating the break with tradition that this represents.

I thought my OP made clear that this was very much tradition (I mentioned the Carl Vinson and Stennis) - but that it is time to rein it in.

[Merijeek]

Originally Posted by RickJay

Reagan was a two term President of the United States. If you're going to name a U.S. Navy ship after a person, it's hard to think of a BETTER choice.

Seriously, John Murtha, whatever you think of his personal politics, is not one of the 500 most important Americans you could name a warship after. He might not be in the top thousand.

Maybe to you. But don't you see how people, currently in the armed forces, who were very recently funneled dumptrucks full of money by Murtha might feel differently?

-Joe

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Originally Posted by RickJay

Reagan was a two term President of the United States. If you're going to name a U.S. Navy ship after a person, it's hard to think of a BETTER choice.

How about anybody or anything who didn't commit treason?

Seriously, John Murtha, whatever you think of his personal politics, is not one of the 500 most important Americans you could name a warship after. He might not be in the top thousand.

I don't think there really are that many who don't already have ships named after them, but Ronald Reagan was even less suitable an option than Murtha. I'm indifferent one way or the other, though.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Why not sell the naming rights to corporate sponsors? It could be some nice revenue for the military.

USS Google? USS Doritos? It could work.

[Kimstu]

Originally Posted by Mr. Moto

I thought my OP made clear that this was very much tradition (I mentioned the Carl Vinson and Stennis) - but that it is time to rein it in.

Well, if this particular decision is in line with tradition, I don't see why you'd consider it as "going way too far". Like I said, I don't see that naming this ship after John Murtha is in any way more "absurd" than naming a submarine after L. Mendel Rivers in the 70's.

As you note, the Navy's been naming vessels after political patrons for quite a while now; I don't think anyone's going to seriously consider abandoning that tradition.

[Mr. Moto]

Originally Posted by Kiber

Here are some other US Navy ships named after people. How many of these meet the Ops criteria?

A1C William H. Pitsenbarger
Abraham Lincoln
Admiral W.M. Callaghan
Alan Shepard
Albert David
Albert J. Myer
Alexander Hamilton
Alfred A. Cunningham
Allen M. Sumner
Amelia Earhart
Andrew J. Higgins
Andrew Jackson
Arleigh Burke
Arnold J. Isbell
Arthur L. Bristol
Arthur W. Radford
Aubrey Fitch

OK - those are just the ones beginning with "A" - but you get the idea.

I think some people might quibble with the USS Andrew Jackson for various historical reasons. I will note that this ship has been decommissioned for some time.

The rest are perfectly defensible - they are military or national leaders and heroes. No real controversies in that list.

[MOIDALIZE]

I'd like to see:

USS Buttafuoco
USS The Situation
USS Lewinsky

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Murtha is both a military figure and a national leader. What's the problem?

[MOIDALIZE]

I was going to seriously suggest James Stockdale, but Wikipedia says he recently had a guided missile destroyer named after him.

Here's a good quote from Stockdale for today:

This is a very important lesson. You must never confuse faith that you will prevail in the end—which you can never afford to lose—with the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be.

[Kimstu]

Murtha was a politician rather than a career servicemember, although he did serve in the military. I don't think there's any question that this decision would be acknowledging his patronage of and support for the Navy while in political office, rather than his military service per se.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Originally Posted by Kimstu

Murtha was a politician rather than a career servicemember, although he did serve in the military. I don't think there's any question that this decision would be acknowledging his patronage of and support for the Navy while in political office, rather than his military service per se.

He served in the Marines for almost 40 years. If that's not career, I don't know what is. He also served in Vietnam and received a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts. He didn't just give some token service. He was hardcore.

He was also the first Vietnam Vet elected to the House of Representatives, by the way, which is a unique distinction all by itself.

[Zebra]

Which would a sailor rather have a tattoo of? John P. Murtha or a Titty Fuck?

[Smeghead]

Originally Posted by Mr. Moto

It is 684 feet long, carries a crew of 365 officers and enlisted

Cool! Do they each get to run the ship one day a year?

Originally Posted by DtC

USS Google? USS Doritos? It could work.

"Where's the Google?"
"We can't find it, sir!"
"Contact the Bing!"

[Alessan]

I'm against it. Not because of the person - I'm not entirely sure who Murtha was - but because it lacks poetry. Ships should have names that are fundamentally cool. "Constitution" - that's a good name for a ship. So are "Monitor", "Hornet" and "Enterprise." "Murtha", though... the thing about a ship's name is that it's also the "team name" of its crew. Who the hell wants to be a member of Team Murtha?

[Ravenman]

Originally Posted by 42fish

I sense a new trend.

Headline in 2025: "US Navy dispatches Titty Fuck, Dirty Sanchez to Persian Gulf"

This sounds like a true American spin on the British tradition of putting glorious or intimidating names on warships. I think we can make a British-to-American translation of ship names:

HMS Illustrious = USS Titty Fuck
HMS Triumph = USS Dirty Sanchez
HMS Archer = USS Get R Done
HMS Dauntless = USS Can o' Whoop Ass
HMS Invincible = USS America... Fuck Yeah

[BobLibDem]

Originally Posted by Alessan

I'm against it. Not because of the person - I'm not entu\irely sure who Murtha was - but because it lacks poetry. Ships should have names that are fundamentally cool. "Constitution" - that's a good name for a ship. So are "Monitor", "Hornet" and "Enterprise." "Murtha", though... the thing about a ship's name is that it's also the "team name" of its crew. Who the hell wants to be a member of Team Murtha?

I don't know, it might be kind of fun to say "We're going to berth the Murtha".

[Terraplane]

Originally Posted by Alessan

I'm against it. Not because of the person - I'm not entu\irely sure who Murtha was - but because it lacks poetry. Ships should have names that are fundamentally cool. "Constitution" - that's a good name for a ship. So are "Monitor", "Hornet" and "Enterprise." "Murtha", though... the thing about a ship's name is that it's also the "team name" of its crew. Who the hell wants to be a member of Team Murtha?

Even worse is when they use the full name with initials. USS Murtha isn't a great name but I like it better than USS John P. Murtha.

[Really Not All That Bright]

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

Why not sell the naming rights to corporate sponsors? It could be some nice revenue for the military.

USS Google? USS Doritos? It could work.

This is the best idea you have ever had. I anxiously await the launch of the LCS GoDaddy.com. Plus I could totally see an aircraft carrier named USS Just Do It, or a cruiser named USS Must-See TV.

[jonesj2205]

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

Why not sell the naming rights to corporate sponsors? It could be some nice revenue for the military.

USS Google? USS Doritos? It could work.

You know that's not the worst idea ever, but you're thinking too small. A ship steaming out of the harbor should look like NASCAR starting line.
Tide, Viagra, Godaddy, Pepsi, Coke, have them all plastered on there.
Naming rights to the biggest sponsor.

[Really Not All That Bright]

We could rename carrier air wings, too. And tank battalions. Hell, the Army is already doing this in reverse - they sold the rights to The Big Red One to a clothing distributor a while back.

[Simplicio]

Originally Posted by Mr. Moto

The rest are perfectly defensible - they are military or national leaders and heroes. No real controversies in that list.

Andrew Higgins was a famous industrialist who built navy ships. I think its a stretch to call him a national leader, and while his role in WWII was important, I think hero is a pretty big stretch as well.

I kinda wish they'd lay off naming US ships after people as well, but if they're going to do so, I don't really have a problem with naming one after Murtha.

[YogSosoth]

Originally Posted by Harmonious Discord

Wouldn't sailors prefer being on the USS Titty Fuck over the USS John P. Murtha?

Not if you're in the Navy

[Chefguy]

Originally Posted by BobLibDem

I don't know, it might be kind of fun to say "We're going to berth the Murtha".

The crew will, of course, make sure they are known as a bunch of Murthafuckers.

[Mr. Miskatonic]

Originally Posted by Simplicio

Andrew Higgins was a famous industrialist who built navy ships. I think its a stretch to call him a national leader, and while his role in WWII was important, I think hero is a pretty big stretch as well.

On the other hand, when you are an industrialist who Eisenhaur says was outright critical to winning the war....

[jayjay]

Originally Posted by Ravenman

HMS Archer = USS Get R Done

The proper spelling is "USS Git R Done". Just sayin'...

[Ravenman]

For that offense, the USS Busier Than a One Legged Man in an Ass Kicking Contest is steaming your way.

[Really Not All That Bright]

Originally Posted by Mr. Miskatonic

On the other hand, when you are an industrialist who Eisenhaur says was outright critical to winning the war....

What does Eisenhower have to say about that?

[Kimstu]

The relative levels of acrimony and levity in this discussion are completely out of balance for a Pit thread. I'm reporting all of you murthafuckers.

[friedo]

I've always found it particularly distasteful to name things after persons who are still alive.

So somebody better go kill Murtha before it's too late.