On Aug 14, 10:15*am, hk wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
...

If that concept were ever true...

There's little to nothing an aircraft carrier can do to stop ICBMs
launched from an inland site thousands of miles away. Most of the Russian
ICBM sites are not reachable by carrier-based planes.

Besides, I was discussing the vulnerability of carriers. They are sitting
ducks for ballistic missiles.

Not to argue, but far less so than you may think. *Carriers don't operate
alone and they are defended with some of the most advanced systems ever
deployed. * *That's not to say they are invulnerable, but it takes a lucky
shot. *Furthermore, it can take quite a hit and survive.

Eisboch

Well, I disagree...but that's okay.

Let me just say that I believe the U.S. goal of being able to project
force, which, after all, is what these capital ships are for, has
meaning only when that "force" is projected against dip**** little
countries that fear such projection. It isn't effective against nations
like China or Russia, or against countries where the rulers don't care
about deaths of their own people, countries like Iran, for example.

--
And what would be a better deterent? Threat of a square dance?