It’s borderline impossible to sink it. Nothing can even get close to it, let alone sink it. If, as you say, magic was involved and it was sank, then the US would glass whichever country did it. This ship represents the peak of American naval power, which is the basis of America’s hard power. A country that sinks the ship is getting an official declaration of war from congress, and the US will unleash its entire arsenal to make an example out of them.
The US would freak out and escalate the war. But they are going to do that anyway sooner or later, this is a forever war, Israel needs it for their domestic agenda, and the US party, the one fixing elections to stay in power, is all in.
But regardless if they did sink it the administration would try and treat it like Pearl Harbor and use it to escalate tensions more than they have support to do already.
Public opinion is the only thing holding them back now, and they aren’t entirely certain how much they need public opinion still given the elections aren’t reliably fixed yet, at least not back to back fixed. We can still stop them here, but the window to do so is closing.
There’s a very big difference between a regime change war like Iraq and Afghanistan and a “destroy them until they surrender” like what happened with Japan in WWII. The US burnt Japan to the ground and nuked it not once, but twice, for attacking a single naval port. That’s a very different kind of war than bombing a country as a pastime hobby. If the Ford carrier gets attacked and sunk, we’ll have a new Japan on our hands and Iran will be destroyed so thoroughly it won’t be recognizable.
You are maybe overestimating the amount of damage bombs can do. We dropped more bombs on Cambodia and Laos in vietnam than we did in all of world war II, and it didn’t change anything. Japan is different in several respects, for one thing we had a real mobilization as compared to now which is our volunteer force, without the support of the public at large or the hysteria behind the country wide mobilization.
For another thing, our government, and Israel’s aren’t in good faith, as our leaders were moreso in WWII. They are operating under false pretenses, ad hoc reasons, ie stopping the nuclear threat is the given reason but the real reason is they are fascist and distracting the citizenry while they consolidate power.
For another reason, Iran has a firm fervent base of support, that is only strengthened when attacked from without, not the least by a group just involved in an attempted final solution against millions of their fellow muslims. The abuses suffered, of which they aren’t spared the details of as we are here by our censorius government and the craven media.
A more realistic possibility however is that the us invades and takes some land around the straits to safeguard ships moving through, that’s what I’d do if I was an amoral piece of shit running a war against Iran here.
Without reading an article, but I will assume you mean a magical macguffin weapon just…sinks it and no one knows what happened. The response depends on a few things.
Without its strike group
Threat assessment will show its defenses were overwelmed by the macguffin weapon. Maybe even conventional missiles - these things aren’t invincible.
With Strike Group
The normal Carrier travels with 12-15 destroyers and other auxiliary vessels to provide screening and defense overlapping. If the carrier is struck and damaged/sunk in the center or back of this strike group, without loss of other vessels, an immediate retreat and Threat assessment will be done to see how the macguffin weapon got past everything else. This would be the concern - again Carriers aren’t invincible, but how your macguffin got past so much radar would be important and the MAIN focus, if the macguffin did not do it in an immediately obvious way.
Strike Group disabled/sunk
If the entire strike group is damaged/sunk, the entire fleet will pull back to begin assessing risk of the macguffin. Damaging a fair number of ships run by the United States in a short order should be beyond poor nations capabilities, so the macguffiin weapon would necessitate reevaluation. Delay of at least a week to assess where/what the macguffin weapon is, (Assuming its a singular object) and then if the target, say Iran, is able to be struck within a specific loss ratio of troops.
A macguffin weapon like a Deathstar type where it can fire at single target position would give most Threat analysis away and the immediate questions to answer would be 1. How much energy/fuel/ammunition does it cost to fire. (If a broke country can afford a mega laser - how don’t I have one?) 2. How does it target (radar can be blocked, is it manually aimed as direct fire/ parabolic like artillery) 3. How can it be avoided (like blocking radar to aim, or like can a physical obstruction block the firing angle. 4. Can it be destroyed (is it susceptible to a strike team on land to sabotage?) 5 Is there more than one.
I wrote my comment in the assumption that there is no immediately obvious cause of damage.
The assumption a carrier- with more bulkheads/damage control teams/position at the heart of a formation suddenly taking critical damage and/or sinking without any warning of incoming enemy planes/missiles would generate the exact amount of panic it sounds like it should. I suppose I kind of missed that in the original comment.
A nuclear device detonating underneath would generate a great amount of concern from the international community, especially if Iran immediately says “yo that wasn’t us”
If it looks like something that could happen again, rather than a one-off fluke, USA would have to change their whole naval doctrine. The strategic arms balance of all countries would need to be reassessed.
Could be used as another USS Liberty, though I’d assume they would go for a cheaper carrier, and it looks like Israel is getting all the support from USA it needs.
People like are terminally online. Your hatred for the US won’t go the way you like it. If a country gets tries to attack this ship, then they’re getting glasses, like actually. The US literally flattened Japan and nuked them twice because they attacked a naval port and partially damaged it. If some country tried to destroy the Ford Carrier, they’re going to face a worse fate.
The last time they needed desperately to bring the public support for a war around bcs the ppl were very much against a war (with financial/imperial goals).
It actually doesn’t matter which administration it is. American policy has been extremely consistent since the founding of the country that if US is ever attacked, the response has to be so ferocious that it guarantees that such an attack will never come again from that country.
When the Mexican American war happened, the US won decisively and annexed half of Mexico. When Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, they literally burnt the country to the ground and nuked it twice for good measure. When Germany did something similar in WWI and WWII, they got bombed into the stone ages. When Al Qaeda did 9/11, the US bombed like a quarter of the globe to make sure this group is incapacitated.
Why wouldn’t the US have a similar response here? The Ford carrier is the peak of American naval power, which is the basis for American hard power. A country attacking this ship is directly attacking the US military and threatening to undermine American power, and that’s not something that’s going to slide. If something like this happens, we might see an official declaration of war from congress, and whichever country attacked the ship is going to be made an example of.
Idk where this idea came from that he has any legal basis in postponing elections.
Even if Congress gave authorization to declare war, and Trump enacted martial law, the worst he could do is use law enforcement to intimidate voters. Which he’s already attempting to do.
Theoretically… what would happen if Iran or someone else happens to magically sink this thing, fighter jets and all?
It’s borderline impossible to sink it. Nothing can even get close to it, let alone sink it. If, as you say, magic was involved and it was sank, then the US would glass whichever country did it. This ship represents the peak of American naval power, which is the basis of America’s hard power. A country that sinks the ship is getting an official declaration of war from congress, and the US will unleash its entire arsenal to make an example out of them.
Israel is going to attack it and say it was Iran and then they will have an excuse to attack Iran for the interest of Israel
“We have now started carpet bombing all our neighbors in solidarity with the Americans.”
No lie, the Trump administration would probably silence the CIA to prevent it from coming out and applaud Netenyahu for committing even more genocide.
Magically? Hypersonic missiles kind of feel like magic, but thet are very real.
The US would freak out and escalate the war. But they are going to do that anyway sooner or later, this is a forever war, Israel needs it for their domestic agenda, and the US party, the one fixing elections to stay in power, is all in.
But regardless if they did sink it the administration would try and treat it like Pearl Harbor and use it to escalate tensions more than they have support to do already.
Public opinion is the only thing holding them back now, and they aren’t entirely certain how much they need public opinion still given the elections aren’t reliably fixed yet, at least not back to back fixed. We can still stop them here, but the window to do so is closing.
There’s a very big difference between a regime change war like Iraq and Afghanistan and a “destroy them until they surrender” like what happened with Japan in WWII. The US burnt Japan to the ground and nuked it not once, but twice, for attacking a single naval port. That’s a very different kind of war than bombing a country as a pastime hobby. If the Ford carrier gets attacked and sunk, we’ll have a new Japan on our hands and Iran will be destroyed so thoroughly it won’t be recognizable.
You are maybe overestimating the amount of damage bombs can do. We dropped more bombs on Cambodia and Laos in vietnam than we did in all of world war II, and it didn’t change anything. Japan is different in several respects, for one thing we had a real mobilization as compared to now which is our volunteer force, without the support of the public at large or the hysteria behind the country wide mobilization.
For another thing, our government, and Israel’s aren’t in good faith, as our leaders were moreso in WWII. They are operating under false pretenses, ad hoc reasons, ie stopping the nuclear threat is the given reason but the real reason is they are fascist and distracting the citizenry while they consolidate power.
For another reason, Iran has a firm fervent base of support, that is only strengthened when attacked from without, not the least by a group just involved in an attempted final solution against millions of their fellow muslims. The abuses suffered, of which they aren’t spared the details of as we are here by our censorius government and the craven media.
A more realistic possibility however is that the us invades and takes some land around the straits to safeguard ships moving through, that’s what I’d do if I was an amoral piece of shit running a war against Iran here.
Without reading an article, but I will assume you mean a magical macguffin weapon just…sinks it and no one knows what happened. The response depends on a few things.
Without its strike group
Threat assessment will show its defenses were overwelmed by the macguffin weapon. Maybe even conventional missiles - these things aren’t invincible.
With Strike Group
The normal Carrier travels with 12-15 destroyers and other auxiliary vessels to provide screening and defense overlapping. If the carrier is struck and damaged/sunk in the center or back of this strike group, without loss of other vessels, an immediate retreat and Threat assessment will be done to see how the macguffin weapon got past everything else. This would be the concern - again Carriers aren’t invincible, but how your macguffin got past so much radar would be important and the MAIN focus, if the macguffin did not do it in an immediately obvious way.
Strike Group disabled/sunk
If the entire strike group is damaged/sunk, the entire fleet will pull back to begin assessing risk of the macguffin. Damaging a fair number of ships run by the United States in a short order should be beyond poor nations capabilities, so the macguffiin weapon would necessitate reevaluation. Delay of at least a week to assess where/what the macguffin weapon is, (Assuming its a singular object) and then if the target, say Iran, is able to be struck within a specific loss ratio of troops.
A macguffin weapon like a Deathstar type where it can fire at single target position would give most Threat analysis away and the immediate questions to answer would be 1. How much energy/fuel/ammunition does it cost to fire. (If a broke country can afford a mega laser - how don’t I have one?) 2. How does it target (radar can be blocked, is it manually aimed as direct fire/ parabolic like artillery) 3. How can it be avoided (like blocking radar to aim, or like can a physical obstruction block the firing angle. 4. Can it be destroyed (is it susceptible to a strike team on land to sabotage?) 5 Is there more than one.
My brother/sister/sibling in the 'tism came out strong, with several scenarios even.
Here, have some stimuli.
Btw, what if a sunk nuke just dives up and goes off?
I wrote my comment in the assumption that there is no immediately obvious cause of damage.
The assumption a carrier- with more bulkheads/damage control teams/position at the heart of a formation suddenly taking critical damage and/or sinking without any warning of incoming enemy planes/missiles would generate the exact amount of panic it sounds like it should. I suppose I kind of missed that in the original comment.
A nuclear device detonating underneath would generate a great amount of concern from the international community, especially if Iran immediately says “yo that wasn’t us”
So does a certain narcissist that took Venezuela, wants to take Greenland and now has his aircraft carrier in the meditteran sea.
Or someone can pull a Ukraine and manually aim and fire missiles from land.
More pollution in the Mediterranean :(
If it looks like something that could happen again, rather than a one-off fluke, USA would have to change their whole naval doctrine. The strategic arms balance of all countries would need to be reassessed.
Could be used as another USS Liberty, though I’d assume they would go for a cheaper carrier, and it looks like Israel is getting all the support from USA it needs.
Impossible. The USS Liberty was a tiny spy ship, this is a supercarrier. Nothing will touch this thing.
I don’t want to see people die, but the US needs to suffer a wound like this.
People like are terminally online. Your hatred for the US won’t go the way you like it. If a country gets tries to attack this ship, then they’re getting glasses, like actually. The US literally flattened Japan and nuked them twice because they attacked a naval port and partially damaged it. If some country tried to destroy the Ford Carrier, they’re going to face a worse fate.
Because that worked out so well the last time…
The last time they needed desperately to bring the public support for a war around bcs the ppl were very much against a war (with financial/imperial goals).
Ohhh … yeah, I see, poor ship.
Monkey paw finger curls
You got downvoted, but with the current administration? A WMD response might be chosen. So it might lead to nuclear war… and a chain effect.
Then, suddenly…
“I don’t want to set the world on fire~” 🥲
It actually doesn’t matter which administration it is. American policy has been extremely consistent since the founding of the country that if US is ever attacked, the response has to be so ferocious that it guarantees that such an attack will never come again from that country.
When the Mexican American war happened, the US won decisively and annexed half of Mexico. When Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, they literally burnt the country to the ground and nuked it twice for good measure. When Germany did something similar in WWI and WWII, they got bombed into the stone ages. When Al Qaeda did 9/11, the US bombed like a quarter of the globe to make sure this group is incapacitated.
Why wouldn’t the US have a similar response here? The Ford carrier is the peak of American naval power, which is the basis for American hard power. A country attacking this ship is directly attacking the US military and threatening to undermine American power, and that’s not something that’s going to slide. If something like this happens, we might see an official declaration of war from congress, and whichever country attacked the ship is going to be made an example of.
Some may speculate that it’s exactly what Trump wants - because then he can postpone elections.
He can’t postpone elections though even in that situation, at least not legally
Idk where this idea came from that he has any legal basis in postponing elections.
Even if Congress gave authorization to declare war, and Trump enacted martial law, the worst he could do is use law enforcement to intimidate voters. Which he’s already attempting to do.
Keep in mind Trump was playing with the idea of nuking a fucking hurricane. Doesn’t seem so far fetched.