The United States Naval Gunfire Support debate (also known as the United States Naval Surface Fire Support debate) is an ongoing debate among the navy, Marine Corps, Congress, and independent groups like the United States Naval Gunfire Support Association on the issue of what role Naval Gunfire Support (NGS) / Naval Surface Fire Support (NSFS) should play within the navy and how such a role can best be provided. At the heart of the issue is the role that naval gunfire support—the use of naval artillery to provide fire support for amphibious assault and other troops operating within their range—should play in the U.S. Navy of the 21st century.
Although the debate at large traces its roots back to the end of World War II, the current debate began in 1992 with the retirement of the last active Iowa-class battleship, USS Missouri (BB-63), as a result of the reduced demand for naval artillery, the rise of ship and submarine-launched missiles and aircraft-launched precision guided munitions (such as laser-guided bombs, which can accurately strike and destroy an enemy target with a single strike). The most striking point of the debate in the United States centers on battleships: owing to the longtime maintenance and upkeep that the four completed Iowa-class battleships have undergone during their time in the navy's active and mothball fleets, many still view battleships as viable solutions for gunfire support, and these members have questioned if the navy can adequately replace the gunfire support provided by a battleship's main guns with the smaller guns on its current fleet of cruisers and destroyers.
The debate has played out across a wide spectrum of media, including newspapers, magazines, web blogs, and congressional research arms like the Government Accountability Office. Each side has presented different arguments on the best approach to the problem, but most of the participants favor the continuation of the DD(X) program or the reinstatement of the Iowa-class battleships to the Naval Vessel Register. The Iowa-class battleships, the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, and Zumwalt-class destroyers have entered the debate as options put forward for naval gunfire support, while others advocate the use of specifically designed close air support planes and newer missile systems that can loiter in an area as a replacement for naval gunfire.
Read more about United States Naval Gunfire Support Debate: Background, Replacing The Battleships, Striking The Iowa-class Battleships, Alternatives To Naval Gunfire, Recent Developments
Famous quotes containing the words united states, united, states, naval, support and/or debate:
“Hollywood ... was the place where the United States perpetrated itself as a universal dream and put the dream into mass production.”
—Angela Carter (19401992)
“God knows that any man who would seek the presidency of the United States is a fool for his pains. The burden is all but intolerable, and the things that I have to do are just as much as the human spirit can carry.”
—Woodrow Wilson (18561924)
“The admission of the States of Wyoming and Idaho to the Union are events full of interest and congratulation, not only to the people of those States now happily endowed with a full participation in our privileges and responsibilities, but to all our people. Another belt of States stretches from the Atlantic to the Pacific.”
—Benjamin Harrison (18331901)
“The world was a huge ball then, the universe a might harmony of ellipses, everything moved mysteriously, incalculable distances through the ether.
We used to feel the awe of the distant stars upon us. All that led to was the eighty-eight naval guns, ersatz, and the night air-raids over cities. A magnificent spectacle.
After the collapse of the socialist dream, I came to America.”
—John Dos Passos (18961970)
“The habit of arguing in support of atheism, whether it be done from conviction or in pretense, is a wicked and impious practice.”
—Marcus Tullius Cicero (10643 B.C.)
“Abject flattery and indiscriminate assentation degrade, as much as indiscriminate contradiction and noisy debate disgust. But a modest assertion of ones own opinion, and a complaisant acquiescence in other peoples, preserve dignity.”
—Philip Dormer Stanhope, 4th Earl Chesterfield (16941773)