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:
“In the United States, though power corrupts, the expectation of power paralyzes.”
—John Kenneth Galbraith (b. 1908)
“The United Nations cannot do anything, and never could; it is not an animate entity or agent. It is a place, a stage, a forum and a shrine ... a place to which powerful people can repair when they are fearful about the course on which their own rhetoric seems to be propelling them.”
—Conor Cruise OBrien (b. 1917)
“Not only [are] our states ... making peace with each other,... you and I, your Majesty, are making peace here, our own peace, the peace of soldiers and the peace of friends.”
—Yitzhak Rabin (b. 1922)
“It is now time to stop and to ask ourselves the question which my last commanding officer, Admiral Hyman Rickover, asked me and every other young naval officer who serves or has served in an atomic submarine. For our Nation M for all of us M that question is, Why not the best?”
—Jimmy Carter (James Earl Carter, Jr.)
“There is much to support the view that it is clothes that wear us, and not we, them; we may make them take the mould of arm or breast, but they mould our hearts, our brains, our tongues to their liking.”
—Virginia Woolf (18821941)
“Like man and wife who nightly keep
Inconsequent debate in sleep
As they dream side by side.”
—Robert Graves (18951985)