Serious question: how will a carrier group fare in arctic ice during winter? Will it be what is needed to hold an Arctic island after showing up all bristly in the summer months?
While the USA’s relatively slim arctic-ready forces are deployed on the Atlantic side of the ice, what will be happening on the pacific side?
An answer: they can take it, but when winter comes, holding it will be difficult. The northern NATO members have notable infantry that can use the ice to advantage, and there are only five or six harbours of interest in Greenland.
Another perspective is that the US has military bases all around Europe. They don’t need to fight in Greenland if they can pressure opposing governments directly on their home turf
Serious question: how will a carrier group fare in arctic ice during winter?
Climate change has made this a receding problem, which is one reason why Greenland is suddenly hot property. In another ten years, you may be able to sail the perimeter of Greenland fully unobstructed all year round.
An answer: they can take it, but when winter comes, holding it will be difficult.
Holding it from whom? Nobody in NATO actually has the stomach for the kind of losses they’d take.
Honest reaction to a serious question. The American military complex isn’t about specific fighting doctrine. It’s by far the world’s largest logistics organization. The airlift capacity of the military likely means that a carrier group wouldn’t have to stick around.
I have mental images of carpet bombing paths through sea ice. Ice is tough, but 500lb dumb bombs do pack quite a punch, and there is a big fleet of bombers that would operate with relative impunity once air dominance is achieved with the aforementioned carrier group.
Serious question: how will a carrier group fare in arctic ice during winter? Will it be what is needed to hold an Arctic island after showing up all bristly in the summer months?
While the USA’s relatively slim arctic-ready forces are deployed on the Atlantic side of the ice, what will be happening on the pacific side?
An answer: they can take it, but when winter comes, holding it will be difficult. The northern NATO members have notable infantry that can use the ice to advantage, and there are only five or six harbours of interest in Greenland.
Another perspective is that the US has military bases all around Europe. They don’t need to fight in Greenland if they can pressure opposing governments directly on their home turf
Climate change has made this a receding problem, which is one reason why Greenland is suddenly hot property. In another ten years, you may be able to sail the perimeter of Greenland fully unobstructed all year round.
Holding it from whom? Nobody in NATO actually has the stomach for the kind of losses they’d take.
Honest reaction to a serious question. The American military complex isn’t about specific fighting doctrine. It’s by far the world’s largest logistics organization. The airlift capacity of the military likely means that a carrier group wouldn’t have to stick around.
I have mental images of carpet bombing paths through sea ice. Ice is tough, but 500lb dumb bombs do pack quite a punch, and there is a big fleet of bombers that would operate with relative impunity once air dominance is achieved with the aforementioned carrier group.