Just read today that the US Navy has decided to name DDG-97 for Adm. William F. "Bull" Halsey. A fitting tribute to a naval hero. Kinda wish they had used his name for the next carrier, though.
The last U.S.S. Halsey was a guided missile frigate decommissioned in the early 1990s. A name like that should have been used earlier than now.

That is good news. I agree with you though, seems to me he rates a carrier. Nimitz did and he was more a sub guy.

I think the trend unfortunatly is to use dead president's names for new carriers....and obvioulsy some not dead presidents....which I think is a disgrace personally...at one time...ships were named after people that had passed away, and had given there all in the defence of their country.....Spruance, Nimitz, etc, etc...then after Nimitz was built they switiched to dead presisdents....now with the Reagan and the Bush....we are now using people that are still alive? come on....you telling me there isn;t enough dead president's in the US's past that they could have used one of them?

I agree with Viper, Fallen fighting hero's names should be used to grace these ships. Also Names of important battles. Not presidents who are still with us. By useing the names of fallen hero's, those hero's live on !

My thoughts,
Garry

Wow.....brings up interesting possibilities though doesn't it? Can you imagine (with a straight face mind you) serving on the U.S.S. Clinton??
To make any sense at all I suppose it would have to be a Sub! #:-)

Tread.

Speaking of ships, names, fallen heros,presidents, etc. Did you guys watch that History Channel special on ex-President Bush (senior)? Interesting show. What do you think of his lost crewmen? Were they dead already? Did they just not hear his command? Or?

I was going to mention that I didn't like naming carriers after living former presidents. Since I am not a big fan of Reagan or Bush, #1 or #2, I felt too biased to say so.

I'm a traditionalist. I like the way ships used to be name, i.e. Batteships for states, cruisers for cities, carriers for famous battles or statesman. I suppose Reagan and Bush qualify for statesman but let's wait until they're dead to do this. Subs were originally for fish then changed to famous Americans, Washington, Patrick Henry. Seems this would be good for presidents Reagan, Bush, yes and Clinton too Tread. Even Carter, he was a sub guy.

Well, for the record, I'm with you HalfYank. I'm from the 'old school' on most things unfortunately.
I think the reason these majestic vessels were originally named the way they were was to avoid any 'tainted' interest whether pro or con in subjects like politics or people. A sound judgement in IMHO! We certainly have our current opinions, but please don't allow the veil of TIME to fog your ideas either.

Tread.

Did any of you ever watch any of them old war films with Reagan in it, he was always a commander of some kind of ship, or sub, and he sank everyone of them, by the end of the film they were all sunk that he commanded. I thought a lot about that back when he got elected