No. I asked a legitimate question based on having 2 BBs.
How do we provide sustainable firepower with what we currently have in inventory in a third theater of war? The question is to provoke some thought at what might me a very valid concern and in the not too distant future -- Pacific operations and the Gulf.
I suspect that good old American creativity will come up with something to meet the threat even if not ideal.
What you said was a scenario of as many as eight(or more) fronts. Post #111.
It is always possible to conjure up a scenario that completely overwhelms us no matter what we do. However that is way outside of reality.
The only real front we have now, or for the next ten years at least, is islamic terrorism using states wherever they can to try to defeat us by a thousand cuts and if possible one or two major hits.
If the two BB's can eliminate their gaining strength or sponsorship by some state and thereby diminish the cuts and the major hits, why not use them.
There has been many reports of the al-qaeda "navy" hidden somewhere.
Two battle groups in different areas could very effectively eliminate that threat.
That seems like a great idea.
Granted a carrier group could do the same but why not leave the carrier groups to the battles they are fighting now.