A former Navy captain just identified the biggest flaw in the US carrier strategy

[Torplexed]

It is a viewpoint you increasingly hear and is certainly a legitimate one. However, you can make the argument that however expensive, obsolete or vulnerable they may be, U.S. carriers have proven infinitely more fungible than the array of missile boats, short range submarines, and advanced missiles that other nations juggle with to counter them. A U.S. carrier can show the flag outside the Strait of Hormuz, support relief operations in Haiti, or kinetic military operations in Libya, while an armada of powerful anti-ship missiles can do little but sit and wait to play their one designated role.

This is probably why states continue to build and invest aircraft carriers even at great trouble and expense. A carrier may never run the risk of an anti-ship missile during its long lifespan, but it will likely contribute to the national interest in some fashion. I guess until such time as a major conflict breaks out and one of these levithans succumbs to a pack of cheap missiles or torpedoes that's how it will be.