Re:The reasons HMS Queen Elizabeth has two ‘islands’
by gozur88 on Monday August 14, 2017 @05:39PM
(#15013218)
Most countries haven't made the commitments the US has. I'm all for reducing the size of the US navy, but first (or at least coincident) we have to reduce our commitments.
One of the problems is we're the guarantor of Japan's security, and we can't do that without at least three carrier battle groups (one on station, one under refit, one in transit). If we stop, Japan will feel compelled to build its own carriers (and not just "helicopter carrying destroyers"), which could kick off a regional naval arms race.
That's the theory, anyway. The Chinese are already building a first-class navy as quickly as they can, so the neighbors are starting to consider their options. And then there's the Norks...
One of the problems is we're the guarantor of Japan's security, and we can't do that without at least three carrier battle groups (one on station, one under refit, one in transit). If we stop, Japan will feel compelled to build its own carriers (and not just "helicopter carrying destroyers"), which could kick off a regional naval arms race.
That's the theory, anyway. The Chinese are already building a first-class navy as quickly as they can, so the neighbors are starting to consider their options. And then there's the Norks...