[FlingWingFlyer]

The terrorist DemonRAT Party running the joint with their drunken skank Judgettes will make sure “secret reports” get leaked.

[LouAvul]

Not much of a secret, now, is it?

[Freee-dame]

Can a multi billion dollar aircraft carrier be taken out by bombs falling from drones?

[DoodleBob]

I wrote his on the prior posting of this article/situation.

Purely from a theoretical perspective, if the simulation showed that we WIN every time, that would mean less basis for more money for weapons, soldiers, R&D, etc.

This, hypothetically of course, would mean that the Pentagon has an incentive to create simulations where they LOSE.

Indeed, what benefit is it to them if they win in a sim? It’s not like the private sector where achievement is rewarded.

In govt, failure = $.

Again…this is purely hypothetical. No government agency would rig a test to get more money. That would be unprecedented.

Do I really need the /sarc?

[philman_36]

Given the state of our military during the Biden era it's not surprising the report came to the conclusion it did.
If you don't intend to win you will always see defeat in any scenario.

[GrumpyOldGuy]

Secret?? Worst kept “secret” ever, this has been known for many years.

[stanne]

The secret report or the not secret report

[Captain Walker]

I thought (Ret) Gen Van Riper demonstrated the vulnerability of the carrier when he "sunk" one during a war game prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

The US couldn't have that result stand, as the Bush administration was trying to get support for the war, so the carrier was brought back to life.

Van Riper called BS and he resigned.

[philman_36]

And, of course, without being able to read it for themselves, as well as see who wrote it,
the people of America must depend on second hand analysis from the media.

[Da Coyote]

It doesn’t take an expert strategist to know that the carriers will be the first thing to go, and the Chinese will quite simply overwhelm our limited defenses.

[MinorityRepublican]

We should be building drone ships instead.

Aircraft carriers are obsolete. Really, that was the case when missiles became common even before we invented drones.

We got away with it because we've been fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq.

[jonrick46]

"China’s arsenal of 600 hypersonic missiles, capable of traveling at five to eight times the speed of sound, would overwhelm our defenses."

Not when we have this weapon:

[HYPOCRACY]

Translation: Give us more money or we will lose.

[Nextrush]

China is the major challenge and even NATO knows it but dare not speak openly because of all the business Europe does with China.

Instead, its dump on Russia rage to justify the military buildup demanded by the US in the first place.

[EnderWiggin1970]

Not to worry. Last I checked China only has 273 times the naval production capacity of the US. Hmm, maybe Washington should worry.

"I can run wild for six months... after that, I have no expectation of success" - Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto on his prospects against the industrial giant of his day, the U.S. He was correct almost down to the day.

[Widget Jr]

https://whois.domaintools.com/istandforfreedom.com

434 days old
Created on 2024-10-03
Expires on 2026-10-03
Updated on 2025-10-04

We really need one more patriotic freedom loving MAGA supporting site to give their opinion a Telegraph article of a NYT article.

This is the same China which has not been a significant participant in any major conflict since the end of the Third Indo-China war in the 1990s, which for China was more of a loss than a win. China can attack and blockade Taiwan and make a big mess, using an untested navy. The last time the Chinese navy harassed a Philippines patrol ship, a Chinese destroyed wrecked the bow of a Chinese Coast Guard vessel and likely killed several crew on the bow of the Chinese Coast Guard ship. Not exactly a strong showing for China, outnumbering the Philippines 2:1 with a real warship and scoring own goals on themselves.

Any study the mirror images US strengths onto a potential adversary while ignoring that adversaries strengths and weaknesses is marketing for increased defense spending, not giving up and withdrawing from a potential conflict. There is a lot out there on the problems the Chinese military has, like real power projection. China simply does not have the sea or air transport necessary to invade Taiwan.

[montag813]

Would have been interesting to see how history would have unfolded had Truman said “Yeah sure, go ahead” when MacArthur requested to use nuclear weapons against Chinese troops entering Korea.

[Rightwing Conspiratr1]

We can’t even build cheap drones. We’ve got a contractor problem.

[DesertRhino]

It’s hard to imagine any professional Naval officer imagining that you can bring carriers into the range of our modern short legged strike aircraft like F-18s or especially F-35s, and that in that range that they are somehow immune.

Subs and large missiles are a serious threat.

I’m not in the retard camp that pretends carriers are obsolete, but in a war against a place like China....we can expect one to be hit. A supercarrier would be damned hard to sink. The ones today are like sinking a hunk of Styrofoam. Not impossible, but very hard. But a devastated one could be taken out of the fight.

[Vermont Lt]

My first thought is that we would just send another.

Then I thought better of it. Instead we would just destroy their dams, flood their country, and eliminate their ability to wage war.

China doesn’t want to get into all that. Not over a heaping pile of rubble that was the Taiwanese chip industry.