Originally Posted by Seldomfitfor purpose
So if we have been in the Stan all these years without our own carriers, being ably assisted by our allies with theirs you have to ask why do we need any of our own at all
Because we can't always rely on others to front up with them, as recently demonstrated by the US Navy's withdrawal from Libya of USS
Kearsarge (and its Harrier AV-8B air group) and Uncle Sam's reluctance to throw a CVN and its much larger air group into the fray. Nor can we guarantee HNS and overflight rights wherever the next mess flares up.
Unlike some, I don't see land and sea-based air as being mutually exclusive. After the costly investment in static infrastructure to establish a long-term airbase in AFG, long and complex logistics train through bandit country for heavy stores, ammo, fuel, etc., plus all the force protection entailed, it would be wasteful not to utilise it even if it needs augmenting with carrier-borne air from those nations who can provide it.
However, when the base is no longer needed it will be an expensive dead duck, unlike a fully operational carrier group that could be sent elsewhere at the drop of a hat to poise covertly offshore as a contingency, act as an overt deterrent or engage in fully-fledged combat operations.