(11-08-2012 10:20 PM)UCF08 Wrote: It lists us as having 11 with 1 in reserve, while the rest of the world has 11 combined. Let me know if its wrong though.
Well, let's take a look. We have 11, plus 1 training carrier in Pensacola/Corpus. Two are in the yards at any time and two are working up to speed after coming out of the yards. That leaves 7. One operating on the east coast, one in the Mediterranean, one somewhere in the Atlantic, one in the Indian Ocean, one in the western Pacific, one in mid-Pacific, and one up and down the west coast. Which one or ones don't we need? And keep in mind that with the heightened tension in the IO, we're keeping two there most of the time, which strains somewhere else.
Quote:Why do we need to be able to overwhelm a small nations air force? Don't get me wrong, if there is a legitimate threat to american sovereignty, say China becomes belligerent and starts building up it's Navy, we should react accordingly. But, if that info in the chart I linked is accurate, I'm not too concerned with our defense if we cut 20-40% of our carriers and focused on the ones you describe.
Overwhelming a small nation's air force was meant as a metric, not a statement of policy. But if we ever get into a scuffle with a small country, then we need to be able to overwhelm their air force, and do it quickly. This one problem I see with the whole "just war" concept is a failure to comprehend the nature of war. Just matching force with force, having enough to tie is a terrible mistake. That's how you end up in never-ending quagmires--Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq. If we are going to use force at all, use overwhelming force. If we need to invade another country, we need to be out in two years, max. Never fight a war you don't intend to win.
The problem with counting carriers is that we're not going to go carrier versus carrier in the middle of the ocean. If that was the threat, then the calculus you're doing would make sense. Those other navies don't have carriers because they are land powers, not maritime powers. Italy needs a carrier to patrol the Med, that's it. They have two, plus three amphibs that can operate at least helos. France needs one carrier in the Med and one in the Atlantic. They have historically had two, right now they have one plus an amphib that can operate helos, and are debating building a second. UK needs one in the Atlantic and a second to deploy in case Argentina decides to retake the Falklands (they sent 3 down there before, but could not do so today); they have one about to stand down, one about to come on, a second building, and an amphib that can operate helos. Spain has Atlantic and Med presence, but can stretch one to do the job since they can keep it in Rota and go either way quickly. India needs one for the IO. China needs one for the China Sea; they just launched one and are building more. They may be about to try to become a blue water power with multiple carriers. Given the growing spheres of influence in Africa and Latin America, that would make sense. Russia probably wants one in the Black Sea/Med, one in the Baltic/North Sea, one in the Arctic, and one in the Far East. They have only one left from the communist era, but I would expect to see them start building some if Putin keeps flexing his muscles. By virtue of our location, we have to be a maritime power. We have different requirements. Right now, we are trying to keep two in the IO, and that is stretching us thin worldwide. We could probably stand to have two more, one on each coast. We had 15 in 1973, and had we had one less in the Atlantic, Israel would probably have nuked Cairo and Damascus and Baghdad.
Historically, the world has one dominant naval power at a time. If we cut back drastically in our carrier force, Russia and/or China would almost certainly step up their efforts and seek to displace us as the dominant naval power. Right now, at our current levels, the price is too high for them. But if we cut our force 20-40%, that calculus would shift. I'm guessing you just pulled that number out of your butt with no knowledge of the subject matter or consequences.
/
Iran fires on US drone in international airspace....last week.
