PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Future Carrier (Including Costs)
View Single Post
Old 12th Sep 2018, 13:39
  #5219 (permalink)  
KenV
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Pontius Navigator
Ken, it might escalate but the whole point of selecting a purely military target is to reduce the certainty of escalation.
"It might escalate?" Or not. You really want to bet on "It might not escalate?"

"Reduce the certainty of escalation?" Which is more certain, that it will or that it will not escalate? And given the uncertainly, you are willing to bet the vast majority of the planet's entire civilized population that it will not? Sounds like a terrible bet to me, whether the target is a CBG or a land air base.

And on the subject of "proportionality", what's proportional about using a Super Hornet launched from a super carrier and now cruising at 15,000 ft releasing a 1000lb guided bomb to take out a Taliban on a bicycle with an RPG? Or using Stealth bombers who've just flown the long way round from the US to Afghanistan to bomb a bunch of stinking dudes hiding in a cave? In the real world of actual military operations, "proportionality" is usually the last thing on any one's mind. If the folks in the field are given weapons free to use nukes, the target list is CERTAIN to include lots of stuff that is not going to be remotely "proportional" in the sense used here.

Consider that Japan bombed "purely military targets" (most of them naval) in Hawaii in 1941. What was the response? B-25s launched from a carrier which bombed the biggest (and very densely civilian populated) city in Japan. And ultimately two nukes on two cities. Why imagine the response will be so much different today?

In short, "proportionality" in military operations is almost certainly a pipe dream. The US has a long history of meeting a direct military threat with overwhelming force. Why imagine that will change? And the US does not even have to use nukes to provide a very devastating response. Is bombing Shanghai or another strategic target into oblivion using non nukes "proportional" to using nukes to take out a CBG? I don't know. Do you?

Last edited by KenV; 12th Sep 2018 at 14:26.
KenV is offline