We do not 'need' the carriers and the 'jets' that go on them, Courtney. There is no strategic imperative to support the notion. The past thirty years helps to explain, and the projected future doesn't seem to warrant a change of direction. Carriers are a cash drain with little return. In our days of territorial influence, the reverse was true: not so today.
And our maritime 'bit' is not sadly lacking, it's fairly healthy in comparative terms; albeit yes, we do need MPA.
And as for 'most other roles', I'd suggest that we are no longer able to commit to all roles as in our global past, let alone being able to fund such other 'projects' across your board.
Large numbers of boots on the ground is fundamental, along with adequate AT suppport. Maritime and Air is equally necessary, but must be balanced in terms of affordability and projection. That said, we are sadly well over the rim in both areas, in terms of quantity.
As for nuclear, we must spend as much as it takes to remain as strong as we are. Otherwise we are nothing.
Last edited by cuefaye; 2nd May 2013 at 21:58.
Reason: sp