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

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?

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

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.

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

Who would be a better choice?

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?

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.

Where do I sign?

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.

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.

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).

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

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?

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.

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

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

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.

I sense a new trend.

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

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.

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

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.

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.