[nathanbedford]

I do not mind defending what I said but I find it a bit tedious to have to defend what I did not say. For example, I did not imply that the end of the Nimitz class construction program was anything but in the natural order of things. My fears about the eclipsing of American power projection capability do not have much to do with the loss of this technology which is inevitable, as another poster points out, in the age of drones, missiles, and satellites.

Second I do not feel obliged to defend any reference to "causation" because I did not make any such reference. To the contrary I stated the proposition about Obamas intention to project power or to refrain from projecting power in the alternative.

Are you taking issue for its own sake?

[thefrankbaum]

For example, I did not imply that the end of the Nimitz class construction program was anything but in the natural order of things. My fears about the eclipsing of American power projection capability do not have much to do with the loss of this technology which is inevitable, as another poster points out, in the age of drones, missiles, and satellites.

You originally said the ending of the Nimitz-class is an ominous omen for American power - I assumed that statement was tied to loss of the platform, rather than a general "the world is changing" statement. Apparently you were speaking more in terms of the latter. I mis-read your original post. Sorry.

To the contrary I stated the proposition about Obamas intention to project power or to refrain from projecting power in the alternative.

Well, maybe causation was not the correct term. Perhaps relevance is. I did not see the interplay between Obama's objectives and the ending of the Nimitz-class. In fact, I still don't.

Are you taking issue for its own sake?

Not at all. I believe you and I have had some fruitful discussions in the past, and was merely trying to understand the various points you had offered.