The Brits are just so much better at ship names than the US. We always name ours after places and politicians--boring! The Brits meanwhile have ships like Onslaught, Firedrake, Acheron, Invincible...

Well, possibly the most ominous one is "HMS Vengeance" - one of the UK's Trident missile subs.

Vengeance is fine for its deterrent use. I would be more worried about Victorious.

Or Terror, mind you - maybe that would be appropriate for a deterrent.

I agree completely. US Navy ship names are nothing short of horrible. They used to have some cool names back in WWII, like Wasp, Hornet, Enterprise, etc. They've kept Enterprise (there's a new Enterprise now planned to replace the now-decommissioned one). They had some cool submarine names way back too, like Nautilus, plus there used to be a bunch named after fish, which isn't too bad. But otherwise, over the last several decades, they just plain suck. The worst one ever is the carrier USS John C Stennis. WTF? They named a carrier after some dumb politician who was never even President, and all he did was get a lot of pork funding for military projects. He also got a Space Center named after him in Mississippi because he was good at this (and this was because he got the center placed there, even though there wasn't any really good logistical reason for it; they do NASA's rocket engine tests there. It's not anywhere near where the engines are actually launched from, it's just a pork project).

Hmm is this our "we have skulls on our hats, are we the bad guys?" moment...?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hn1VxaMEjRU

The thing is, those skulls don't come from WWII, they originate with the napoleonic wars.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a6/John_Eve...