Ken
FNS Charles de Gaulle and USS Kearsage are at sea off of Libya now, flying air support missions to back up UN Resolution 1973.
We now know that Malta did allow the extraction of civillians but refused to permit NFZ missions. Some other countries, though happy this time to allow HNS, did so only after delay, and with the imposition of certain conditions relating to political control.
We knew that post SDSR, HMG envisaged only one FJ carrier, that it could not change the build programme without providing alternative work for UK shipyards or pay compensation to BAe. We also knew that the F-35 purchase was being changed from the Model B to C with the numbers required now much reduced.
Based on all the above, the standard of journalism in this piece from Reuters fails to inspire much confidence
A carrier like everything else is vulnerable to attack. That's why when needed, it can be defended by submarines and aircraft against an ASW threat and/or by SAM and CIWS carrying escorts. It can also move its location. Land based aircraft and airfields equally at risk once air control is lost or the threat from TLACM's cannot be countered. This is being demonstrated over Libya at this moment!
Final point Libya is on the edge of Europe and closer to most places we fly to on holiday. Can Reuters chappie guarantee the next crisis will be in a State as conveniently located
