Hacker News Reader

US defense doctrine mostly revolves around massive surprise first strikes on countries with limited ability to retaliate. Aircraft carriers are OK at this, if you want to, eg, bomb the crap out of Uruguay and don't have basing or transit rights nearby. That doesn't eliminate their vulnerabilities or the cost/benefit ratio, but having a few is handy if you're running a global empire.

View on HN

I don't think this describes US defense doctrine. America has not launched a massive surprise first strike in a very long time (if ever). Iraq and Afghanistan knew the invasion was coming a long way off.

To me, US defense doctrine relies on 1) massive logistical power projection capability to counter any terrorism threat (real or perceived) anywhere on the globe, and 2) large conventional forces to counterbalance other large geopolitical rivals (Russia, China).

"Surprise" is relative; "blitzkrieg" (or "shock and awe") might be more apt. Iraq I, Iraq II, Afghanistan, Grenada, Panama all fit the pattern. Kosovo doesn't as much, but then again there were other considerations there (eg, not pissing off Russia too much).

You're right on the higher-level strategy, but operationally it relies heavily on immediately killing off all C&C, air defense, air force, etc. in the first few hours so you can then bomb with impunity.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com