18 September 2021

Uhhhhhhhh

This article on USS Wasp even has a picture of USS Wasp!

This USS Wasp, in fact:

A pity that the article is about THIS USS Wasp...

I guess we're lucky we didn't get THIS USS Wasp...


How embarrassing for them!

3 comments:

  1. During the 2016 election, one of the parties was running a 'patriotic' video slide show of our services, showing the personnel and the equipment, and they showed... (drumroll please) a picture of that floating dogsqueeze of a carrier that Russia occasionally lets out of drydock. Not even one of our landing ship carrier ships, not a pre-nuke super carrier, not even a WWII fleet carrier or a light carrier or a jeep carrier or even the bodged together Langly, nope. The ski-jump equipped with planes with red stars piece of carp that breaks down whenever Mother Russia tries to use it. You know, the one that looks like it's actually coal powered because it burns oil so badly. Yeah. Top men. TOOOOP MEN!

    As to the article, the writer seems to think that since it was built to a pre-WWII design, she was a bad ship. Gee, the same could be said for the Yorktown, or the Hornet, or even the Enterprise, all pre-war ships with their faults and compromises. The very issues discovered in all these ships led to the much-better Essex and later carriers, which, funny, have less armor than the Wasp did.

    Gee. What's next? Pointing out the faults of the Fairley Swordfish? Too slow, biwing, fabric covered, limited range? Was a horrible plane to have in WWII except it worked for the British...

    ReplyDelete
  2. I guess nobody told them that names sometimes (often) get re-used!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Take the lowest common denominator.
    Likely just too lazy to check on the first picture that popped up on Wiki, "just run with it, no one will notice" is their corporate motto.

    ReplyDelete

You are a guest here when you comment. Be polite. Inappropriate comments will be deleted without mention. Amnesty period is expired.

Do not go off on a tangent, stay with the topic of the post. If I can't tell what your point is in the first couple of sentences I'm flushing it.

If you're trying to comment anonymously: Sign your work.

Anonymous comments must pass a higher bar than others. Repeat offenders must pass an even higher bar.

If you can't comprehend this, don't comment; because I'm going to moderate and mock you for wasting your time.