The Great Game on the High Seas
show comments
  • Anthony

    “Proliferation, Great and Small….” Power, regional power balancing, security, and Pacific water contention are all menu items influencing various strategic considerations in “The Great Game on the High Seas.”

  • Mike M.

    Yet more good reasons why a significant downsizing of our military might not be such a great idea.

    Every time we have done this in our history, other less benign powers have been more than happy to try to fill the vacuum, and this time will be no different.

  • Mrs. Davis

    Good reasons to downsize the Army & Marines as they won’t be fighting ground wars for a while, cut back carriers and Zumwalts as they are just targets and accelerate submarine and asw sensor construction as they are the weapons that will be used in this theater.

  • Jim.

    Honestly, we probably shouldn’t even have mothballed our battleships. Most of the population of this world lives within reach of their guns.

    The fact is that aircraft carriers have been “obselete” for, oh, 60 years now because “new” technology has rendered them “less secure”. Read John Keegan’s Cold War-era “The Price of Admiralty” if you doubt.

    The fact is, if aircraft carriers are “obselete” then so are oil tankers and cargo ships.

    In anything other than an all-out nuclear war, carriers are too useful to be ditched. We’re smart to have so many. We’d be smart to maintain strong ground forces as well, so we don’t find ourselves in the same position as Britain did before each World War. If they’d been better prepared, they wouldn’t be in such a sorry state now.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.