Mike "Hits it out of the ballpark"

Thanks to those who noticed my recent Oped "Waiting for the Navy's Petraeus", including CDR Salamnder who wrote:

Mike Burleson at OpinionEditorials.com just hits it out of the ballpark (mostly). He is a little off in that some of his "new" threats are really quite old but ignored, and he gives LCS to much credit - but where he is right, he is right.

And my good buddy Galrahn at Information Dissemination:

Frequent contributor Mike Burleson put out an editorial last Tuesday. Let me start by saying that those interested in Navy issues will find Mike's Friday Sea Links blog update one of the best roundups on the web of the previous week. Mike's editorial is a follow up to a blog entry he made on September 25th, except the editorial has more to it.

Also, the great naval author Norman Polmar yelled at me (kind of) in the Comments section recently:

BIG aircraft carriers are NOT vulnerable... that comment has not appeared in any of my PROCEEDINGS columns that have sparked the current controversy. Rather, we need more BIG carriers--but even the current 12-ship plan is unaffordable. It will be dollars and not missiles that sink big ships.... What are the alternatives as we will soon have only 10 large carriers... I think the answer is LHA/LHD type ships. LAND AIRFIELDS are vulnerable to enemy attack (Vietnam) and politics (Spain, Libya, Saudi Arabia, and a score of other countries).
Norman Polmar

Thanks again, folks, for your interest in our hard-working Navy!