Korean Seaboy
Active member
Well, in my personal untrained opinion, I believe that carriers are a waste of money and resources unless you have a decent air force
MOVING TARGETS
Korean Seaboy
Active member
The Pentagon really needs to reorganize. It's a huge, roaring bureaucracy with useless pencil pushers at every office. The military likewise should spend less on conventional missiles and more at tanks, infantry, etc.... War means soldiers fighting soldiers, not some push buttons, watch Tomahawk missiles fly, and run for cover. The US will run out of missiles
What countries that are operating aircraft carriers don't have a 'decent' naval airforce, at least in comparison to potential neighboring enemy countries?
America doesn't have to be the world's police force, we can let others do it but, not get upset when another country solves the problem, 'their way'! There will always be a major power that will use its influence to make things go their way.
The another aspect is without carriers, the USN has no air support for its surface ships. That would confine the Navy to the litoral waters where land based aircraft could provide air protection for the surface ships.
Today's carrier fleet is just as much in demand as ever. They wind-up doing things for national security that a more competent State Department should do!
What type of conventional missiles, are you talking of Tomahawks, Harpoons, (etc.), missiles? The strategic or ballistic missiles are simply in storage. Tactical missiles are a major component in America's ability target bad guys without endangering US pilots.
Osama Bin Laden in an interview said the attack on the Twin Towers was a mistake! He expected President Bush to send s few 'dozen' Tomahawk missiles as the US form of retaliation for the attack, just as President Clinton had done. He did not expect President Bush to lead America into a war over the attack.
War also mean more of your stay out of harm's way when one side has a technical superiority. People die "IF" (in greater numbers), you don't have superior training and weapons. Missiles allow the US military to take out high threat targets or targets in which surprise is a major element. In essence the USA is using its robots to kill other people's military. Is it a fair fight? Heavens no but, you don't want a fair fight. You want to kill as much enemy as possible with as small a loss on your side. The USA has been fighting this way for decades.
The liability is that national leaders are more willing to use these weapons rather than negotiate a problem through a peaceful solution.
No... they are still in low rate production from Raytheon! In 2008, the UK started receiving its first Mk. 4 variants.
Yossarian
Forum Resistance Leader
Carriers can provide a good combat multiplier to any amphibious force as well, and enhance fleet protection, this was proven in WW ll, and also in the Falkands engagement.
If done right, an carrier militarily can enhance a combat force's effectiveness offensively and defensively, it's been proven, protection of such and asset would be vital to any modern fleet force.
As would targeting an carrier.
If done right, an carrier militarily can enhance a combat force's effectiveness offensively and defensively, it's been proven, protection of such and asset would be vital to any modern fleet force.
As would targeting an carrier.