USS Salt Lake City nuclear submarine doesn't sound right

Who knew that there was a nuclear submarine that was named the USS Salt Lake City? Well, there is, and part of me cannot help but be perplexed. The problem is the name. It doesn't fit.

Although Utah has a long history of supporting the armed forces, having a weapon of mass destruction named after our fair city does not suit a place where pioneers escaped persecution in a long exodus, building a "new Zion" in the middle of nowhere to be unmolested. It was hoped that the world would think peace, love and tolerance when they heard the name Salt Lake City, not fear and trembling.

Besides, if we name naval ships after communities, one day we might have ships called Elephant Butte, Idiot Creek, Dork Canal or even Zyzzx. We don't want our enemies to think we are asleep at the wheel as we attack them. Frankly, a more appropriate name for a ship than the USS Salt Lake City would be the USS Don't-Tread-on-Me or the USS Get-Out-Of-The-Way-Or-Be-Crushed. Those labels are straight-forward and macho. Our enemies need to think of us in this way and not as the USS Panic. (That's in Pennsylvania).

The word is now out that the 20-year-old USS Salt Lake City will soon be no more. Because of budget cuts, the U.S. Navy is decommissioning the nuclear submarine Oct. 26 during a ceremony in San Diego. The sub will then take a skeleton crew around the Arctic ice cap and on to Connecticut, where it will be taken apart. I would have been pleased if they just changed the name.