RE: More on Star Wars Ships

I think the name "Star Destroyer" was to imply that they had the
firepower to destroy a star. Although not true, since there is some
reference to "it would take a thousand star destroyers to destroy a
planet" or something like that, and even the Death Star only had enough
to destroy a planet, not a star.

There is something to be said about naming stuff for propoganda purposes
- i.e. Titanic (named for her large size), the Reagan "Star Wars"
projects, A-10 Thunderbolt II, "Grand Slam" 22,000 lbs bomb.  Such names
may inspire more fear than the actual product.	

--Binhan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ryan M Gill [mailto:rmgill@mindspring.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 2:17 PM
> To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
> Subject: Re: More on Star Wars Ships
> 
> I think the thing to remember with Star Destroyers is that they are 
> not Destroyers. The radical difference between the role of the 
> Frigate in the days of sail and the current use/size comparison 
> between them and other men of war is a very good illustrator of point.