Disingenuous.
"Ships" aren't mentioned either, but clearly the national defence encompasses both.
"Ships" are not mentioned, but the Navy clearly is. If The Consitution must be followed literally, and the founders took the trouble to specifically authorize only an Army and a Navy, then shouldn't that be the limit?
Article 1:
Clause 12:
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
Clause 13:
To provide and maintain a Navy;
Clause 14:
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
If the Constitution is to be followed literally, it authorises land and naval forces, but not air forces. On the other hand, if we take an expansive view of the Constitution as a living document, we'd assume that the founding fathers would want the Government to take changes in technology and circumstances into consideration. The Constitution does not ban air forces. Nor does it ban Social Security (or limits on campaign contributions).