Originally Posted by
ThumbsUp
That is not generally the consensus on the Joint Staff, so I’m not sure what national security perspective that you are referring to.
You have to understand how that game is played... of *course* they'll advocate for policy which is tangentially beneficial to their mission planning and execution, when it doesn't come out of their budget.
It would also be *really* great to have 20 carrier strike groups and associated air wings, escorts, and log ships. But you don't see the JS pushing for that now do you? Why? Because they'd have to pay for it...
Ultimately it's a calculated risk... rely on allies, partners, and third parties for merchant lift (for both economic and security purposes). Alternative would be to artificially build a US merchant fleet, which the government would likely have to prop up indefinitely.