Embed Notice

RT: @JamesWebb_16 We no longer have a carrier presence in the Pacific…

The debate about the food aboard the Lincoln and now the George Washington is largely a red herring. Arguing about food substitutes an emotional argument for a stark practical one. The real issue is how the war on Iran is burning through equipment and people. I.e., now the Lincoln, along with the Ford, will most certainly undergo maintenance for an extended period because of the length of their deployments in support of the war in Iran. Those deployments will also hurt retention (this was a major issue during the Iraq War in particular; remember stop loss?) And the question is: for what? It’s not like they were chasing the Imperial Japanese Navy across the Pacific following an attack like Pearl Harbor.

Now the Administration, despite all the warnings about Taiwan and a China-focused National Security Strategy, is moving our only carrier out of the Pacific. This is a major strategic signal, coming on the heels of news that we’ve burned through other major capabilities such as interceptors, radars, stand-off munitions, and a large chunk of the MQ-9 fleet, among other things.

It is clear that the Iran war is not only detrimental to US national security, but a potential strategic blunder worse than Iraq if we don’t cut bait; and this is the conversation pro-war types want to avoid at all costs.