Replies

1) The Navy is not above presenting biased information to support its pet projects.

2) The judge acknowledged that the system appears to have some military benefits, but she "ruled that the Navy and the National Marine Fisheries Service failed to consider alternatives that could shield whales and other marine life from these loud sounds", nor did she find the Navy's argument so compelling as to allow them to pursue testing and deployment without restrictions.

Her ruling sounds reasonable to me, boiling down to an order to proceed slowly and carefully with research on this system, and fully explore alternatives and modifications which would mitigate its harmful effects. Meanwhile, until improvements can be made, her ruling permits use of the system when it's really needed to deal with immediate military threats.

1) I expect the Navy to be biased in favor of bringing the sailors and ships it is responsible for home safe and sound from combat experience. If you can avoid hurting whales, fine. If it's a choice between losing a ship or having some whales buy it - well, too bad for the whales, but our sailors and ships have to have top priority.

2) The response to the restrictions is simple: You fight the way you train. Unless you can guarantee that the PRC will fight us in the exact conditions produced by these restrictions, then you really need to get out of the Navy's way on this.