Wageslave,
Regardless of the nobilities of having [allegedly] better-equipped carriers, this thread started because of Sharkey's article and it has provoked thought.
His written article is woefully inaccurate and out of date. His assumptions are wrong and therefore his analyses are muddled and flawed to a point where all they really do is serve to back up the last two paragraphs - which are his personal gripes. Assuming the reader is given the facts - which this article fails to logically present - you wouldn't have to be a professional military person at all to reason with his conclusions; they would be self-evident. Unfortunately the facts presented are half-truths, lies and inflammatory statements.
As I've said, the arguments are fundamentally flawed and tainted by an anti-RAF narrative which Sharkey has helped peddle for nearly 3 decades.
I'm also older than Tornado but unlike you I don't necessarily link capability with age. Your brief on the jet's capability is clearly as old as the author's drivel.