Straw man argument. Nobody is arguing that small wars will never again occur, or be necessary from time to time. However we started "small wars" that completely took our eyes off the ball with respect to actually defending the United States and our national interests. That was the humongous error that was made in Iraq, wherein we cost ourselves vastly more in blood and treasure than the payoff, even if it had occurred, would ever have been worth.

It takes self discipline to avoid getting embroiled in stupid small wars. Self-discipline that was not exercised in the 2000s, as it was in the 1990s.

Besides, it is up to our allies to build their own military capabilities, with US advice and assistance as needed, so that we don't have to do the heavy lifting ourselves. That is not so much an issue with our NATO allies and major IndoPac allies, but it IS an issue with some of our middle eastern allies, and some of our lesser IndoPac allies.

This is not an argument to withdraw from foreign presence. But we must never again fall for the warmongering arguments of the Bush 43 administration that got us entangled in the horrible briar patch that Iraq became for us in the 2000s. That was actually not a "small war" but a middling sized war. We cannot afford such wars going forward if we are to maintain our edge to fend off Russia and China.

On this one you're right on the money.

My acquaintance showed me methods how she was averaging over $4k on a monthly basis by doing a job she found on the web... The most useful advantage of working via internet is that I am usually home with the little kids or even I conveniently move out on trip for a long time. I got very amazed and chose to try out... Now I feel very graced she told me this, and want to strongly recommend it to all people to give it a go... This is just what I do> slink.co/a67bf

I was just admiring how the Virginia has evolved. The new block is neat, and the U.S. continues to pump them out, along with Arleigh Burkes and Fords. I agree with your thought on security, the USN is the gatekeeper. I hope they can improve the maintenance game some, to keep these assets deployed and ready.

Robot ships, lol. Until I see one that is secure from cyber and EW attacks, with some kick ass AI in the event it becomes detached, and bristling with weapons and armor, I'll retain the view they are irrelevant except in the case of draining funding for real and effective naval platforms.

Again with "small wars" bullshit concept? Fighting these UNWINNABLE and endless small wars only drains the nation's resources and it prevents it from developing the military power needed to defend the nation against state powers, which is EXACTLY what Russia and China want. This concept it's so simple only retards can't get it: if you have to spend trillions of dollars by sending your own military to fight while your enemies use proxy forces to achieve their goals, you're stupid, they're smart, they win, you lose. Why is this so damn difficult to comprehend by those brainiacs in the Pentagon? This "small wars" crap was CREATED, it was not a necessity that came from outside, it was CREATED by the Bush administration (talking about traitors). The fact is you can't have a military that can fight both small wars and be ready to fight big wars against big state military powers in the same time. You gotta choose one and the most important ability is to fight state powers that have nuclear arsenals with which they can wipe you out from existence. The best way to fight guerrilla forces is through proxies. Pay others to do the fight for you. Otherwise, you get tangled up in endless unwinnable wars, which weakens your country morally and economically while your main state enemies build conventional forces designed to beat you in a large scale conventional war. Those Pentagon idiots are doing exactly what Russia and China want. So wasting so many resources and time to create a force designed to fight guerrilla forces, which is impossible anyway, is simple RETARDED. I swear, the Pentagon is run by lobotomized chimps...

And just where are the peer to peer battles to take place? A show of force may be wise under the circumstances, but the WW 2 island hopping & land invasions wont work today or tomorrow. What lessons have been learned from the battlefront since WW 2? The mindset will take longer to change then anyone understands, save for the visionaries.

Russia and China don't need carriers because they are not trying to project power all over the world. All they have to do is dominate their "near abroad".
Can they(and Iran) do that with their emphasis on anti-ship missles and surface to air missles? Could a cheap Iranian anti-ship missle or small ship sink a US carrier? It is certainly possible that US defenses knock down 99% but one missle or ship gets through.