Why does the US need a large surface navy?

Cuz this was necessary and should not be ever again: https://www.defense.gov/News/Featur...n-japan-78-years-ago-buoyed-american-spirits/

 

But, what does a naval surface vessel do besides "shoot something", send planes out to "shoot something", or threaten to "shoot something"? Unless you count the goodwill aspect of have several thousand sailors spending tons of money when the ship docks at friendly ports-of-call, what advantage, per se, do surface vessels provide? I don't see how the actual purpose of anybody's military navy is "rendered moot" unless it floats on top of the water....

 

I guess 3 million Vietnamese don't matter? The ones we claimed to be protecting.

 

My post was as plain as I can make it; if you do not want to understand, I cannot help you.

 

Probably not... after all, those dead Vietnamese are "dead and dust", just like the 60,000 Americans -- but at least the Vietnamese were fighting for their country (right or wrong). What did the Americans die for? Lyndon Johnson? Richard Nixon? What a sickening joke....

Nobody cares... not the autocrats in Hanoi, and not Joe Biden. Joe's handlers just want to appear to add an "ally" that they think they can depend on to counter Chinese ambitions. But although the U. S. may be a good market for Vietnamese products (like cheap shirts and shiitake mushrooms), don't look for little Vietnam to actually to join in any active opposition to China, its 2,000,000-man armed forces, and its formidable arsenal of weapons -- all of which is just across their entire northern border....

 

I'm only trying to be objective. You indicate that surface vessels are necessary in the Navy today because they do things that submarines cannot do. And you suggest that about all a submarine can do is to "shoot something".

So, I asked in reply, what does a naval surface vessel do besides "shoot something", send planes out to "shoot something", or threaten to "shoot something"? Surely the function, in military terms is nearly identical, except that I suggest that a submarine can do the same thing better because it would be much harder for an adversary to counteract or destroy.

Surely we can convince any potential opponent that if they attempt to deny the United States passage through international waters that we reserve the right to blow their ass away -- and very efficiently so, with submarines![/QUOTE]