>>>>>>>It wouldn't take the 'mighty U.S. war machine' but simply a navy seal team (or maybe the British SBS would volunteer) :o)
>>>>>>>but even that is not without risks
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I wonder if somebody enters the service expecting to fight pirates.
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes, but not the service, but rather when someone is accepted into a special program of the service...
>>>>>
>>>>>However, it could be assumed that it is indeed a specified role of the navy and falls under their purpose to “Keep all Free trade Shipping lanes open”
>>>>
>>>>They may as well. There doesn't seem to be much military need for a navy in the modern world.
>>>
>>>You're kidding, right?
>>
>>As a means of delivering supplies and troops, the navy still has a place. As a fighting force, no. We have probably seen the last sea battle.'
>
>There is also the purpose of a mobile launch platform. Our subs have, I believe, more warheads immediately available than our land installations and carrier based aircraft as well as ships firing missiles like the TOW are essential. Sure, the days of the big battleship may be over, since they are so vulnerable but the navy is still a very major combat component.
>
>And don't forget, the range of a N. Korean missile wouldn't be much of an issue if it were fired from a sub 20 miles off the coast of LA.


And you know that the North Koreans have no submarines with that capability and no missiles with that either . But its always good to hear the "security lobby".