OAP Some pages back you insisted carriers were no good as they were vulnerable to ballistic missile and other types of attack. When I asked a rhetorical question about whether airfields were at any such risk, you claimed it would require in depth analysis to answer that question.
Now I state the UK has commanded what is normally a carrier task group (ie the sore of thing a carrier does) and that carrier based aircraft may have a role to play in countering the influence of an increasingly belligerent Moscow, and claim it is simplistic and bears no weight.
Why? Are you unwilling to provide any explanation to your extortions?
As for Floating Gin Palace - would you use this term to describe the American and French carriers hitting terrorist targets in Iraq and Syria? Would you use that term for Ocean during her time as flagship of CTF 50? What about carriers deployed in previous conflicts and crises?