Posted on 05/28/2015 6:52:21 AM PDT by C19fan
“History,” it has been written, “does not repeat itself, but it rhymes.” Today it’s rhyming with Gen. Billy Mitchell. In the 1920s, Mitchell challenged conventional thinking by advocating air power at sea in the face of a naval establishment dominated by battleship proponents.
The hubris of the “battleship Navy” was such that just nine days before Pearl Harbor, the official program for the 1941 Army-Navy game displayed a full page photograph of the battleship USS Arizona with language virtually extolling its invincibility.
Of course, the reason that no one had yet sunk a battleship from the air — in combat — was that no one had yet tried.
(Excerpt) Read more at medium.com ...
Several billion dollar target groups of the most advanced technology in the world. Still vulnerable to that rogue missile, swarm or targetable ICBM carrier killer that comes from straight up.
They are a projection of power against an enemy without the means to respond. One good nuke makes them flotsam.
We would be so much better off if we had no carriers, the AF no planes and the Army no armor. Just sitting ducks. /sarc
Stupid anti A/C Carrier armchair admirals of Free Republic. Thank God nobody is listening to these lunes.
A good case can be made that we’d be better off with 25 or 30 25000 ton carriers operating 60 aircraft each opposed to 10 supercarriers operating 90.
Carriers PROJECT FORCE into anywhere you want them to. That’s what they are built for.
Yes, they can be vulnerable, but that’s the tradeoff for the ability to project force quickly, without established bases.
Fix wing naval aviation from A/C carriers will become obsolete when the concept of air superiority over huge swaths of ocean becomes obsolete. I.E. NEVER.
Correct!
History Repeats itself, for anyone who doubts me, here is an excellent Segment in the Documentary Battleship
I encourage everyone to watch the whole think.
https://youtu.be/aoHzFfW0jhY?t=4m40s
We have made it to where our Navy (or Air Force) can't incur any loses without it severely damaging us.
According to these lunes we would be better off with no A/C carriers and the ChiComs had 10 CVBG’s. LOL
And since we are the only country that has super carriers, they act as a firm reminder not to mess with us.
When a ship that size, with its associated weapons, roles up into your AO, it is either a big relief or a giant warning.
There'd be no war today if mothers all would say, "I didn't raise my boy to be a soldier."
Also, carriers do not travel alone. The modern destroyers and frigates provide layered defense and carry more raw firepower than a cruiser from WWII.@
What happens when the next generation of generals and admirals decides that losing a few dozen million civilians doesn't matter, if they wipe out our ability to manage ocean battles?
Presuming we have a CiC that still cares more about America than their own “legacy”.
Yes.
If a super carrier gets lost it’ll take years to build a new one.
Our whole war fighting strategy is based on not losing any assets.think about how crazy that is.
You said it better than me.
There is no President who would kill a million civilians over a successful attack on a military target.
Washington, DC, NYC, Chicago, LA, San Fran, Norfolk, etc. etc, etc are all vulnerable to the same threats.
Our perceived willingness to use the SSBNs in retaliation is the ultimate defense for a carrier battle group.
Once that is gone, nothing is safe. (well, maybe Cheyenne Mountain...for a while...)
M4L Battleship
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.