Hypersonic missiles

[Pew]

Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
I doubt it would be a NATO vs. xxxxx situation.

I think most of the planet would either get out of the way or support. There was significantly more support after 9/11 than NATO, and the destruction of an aircraft carrier would likely be as bad or worse.


I honestly think foreign support at that point wouldn't be from a 'you sunk our carrier' standpoint; rather more of everybody wants an excuse to attack said nation because they don't like them.

But knowing the lack of retaliation in previous naval "incidents"..........

 

[DoubleWasp]

I think it's less of a matter of "like or not" and more a matter of, "What else?"

A nation does not simply sink an aircraft carrier and then go back home and do some grocery shopping.

These sorts of events always come before a massive military expansion. Whichever nation it may be, the entire planet is going to be wondering if they are next.

Asian nations have this awful habit of taking each other over and slaughtering as many people as possible when conducting major military campaigns. Nobody is going to sit around and wonder what comes next. The planet also knows that any agreement, treaty, or armistice made with an Asian nation is worth less than the paper it is printed on without a strategic guarantee. Whether Russia or China, an alliance with them is pointless. They couldn't even hold an alliance with each other.

Both Russia and China are both engaged in multiple serious territorial disputes with their neighbors. North Korea needs no introduction.

Then there is the possibility of ending up in the crossfire of punitive efforts. Any nation of the planet has little recourse left but to either join, roll over for the US, or take their awful chances with the offending nation.

There have been some bad naval incidents. Pueblo comes to mind. But that's hardly the sinking of a carrier and the presumable destruction of an entire battle group in the process. No way of coming back from that one.