Once China can nullify our ICBMs it doesn't really matter what the ABM disparity is. It is only a matter of time and selling them S-400 was stupid.
Yeah, in Russias list of problems that wouldn't even be in the top 1,000.
The S-400 they bought would not be the same as the S-400 that Russia uses, but it will likely shoot down a few Japanese and USN F-35s... so it is well worth helping to cover that direction from US attack.
China will remain vulnerable to ICBM attack, just like Russia and the US and the EU... once they find a way of defeating, then those methods of defeating become a target first, or some way of bypassing them will be developed... the idea that any side could get a superiority to allow them victory without enormous losses and complete destruction of everyones economy is a little naive... Even if the US replaced the moon with their own death star... how could they use it to kill everyone but them?
American incompetence and operational ineptitude. I say it how it is, as an American, to be bested this way shows me the other arguments are bogus. Equipment does not mean anything,
The biggest failing of America is that it is trying to fight Russia and China when they don't want to fight. US sanctions have cut ties with Russia and you are pushing China to look for alternatives too... if you had just ignored all the shit that you keep bleating about... like Crimea and Syria and Georgia and other crap that really didn't mean anything to the west, then Russia could be cooperating in lots of areas with the west and making the west stronger and more cohesive... if the Russians were friends the solutions to problems like Iran and North Korea and Syria might have been solved by now... not completely in a way the west wants, but in a way that both sides can live with so perhaps some compromises in areas the US and the west probably don't give a shit about anyway.
But instead Russia and China are the enemy and you have made them separate and stronger than they could ever been if you had just treated them with respect like normal countries, which is what they are, but US international relations are not normal... look at how you treat the EU and your other allies.
Ahhh well... a missed opportunity for the west because China and Russia have some ways of doing things that the west could certainly learn from, and vice versa, but for the last few decades the west is set to transmit and not receive... Russia and China are going to grow and get stronger no matter what you do, but what you have done means they wont feel any need to show you any respect or gratitude for your part in their struggle from near collapse in the 1990s to today...
If soviet era sams bested modern NATO airforces, than equivocally we could say the soviet fleet would best the modern NATO Navies. If they have the same planners, strategists and tacticians then no amount of carriers will save us. 22350 makes less a difference than the commander of the Northern Fleet.
The Soviets had good weapons and good planners and strategists and tacticians, and Russia... post 1990s seems to have the same and certainly a rational leader in Putin, but as the Germans found during WWII having a powerful army that can trash anyone elses with brand new tactics is not enough. Their army was good enough even if it started with inferior material like the early Panzers, their layout saved them from the fate of the T-26... but over the period of the war their enemies learned to match and then be superior to them. Their airforce started out as king and some of their pilots racked up enormous kill scores, but with no strategic bombing capacity then the production beyond the Urals was safe and their navy was not sufficiently powerful to cut europe off from the US... or the UK from the US...
Right now Russia is not threat to the US in terms of navy except SSBNs. The US has the potential to threaten Russia with its carrier groups, but developments in terms of Kinzhal and Zircon and Kh-32 potentially rather costly.
But you are not thinking straight... a navy isn't a war winning or fighting weapon in this situation... Americas navy means it can move forces and apply force anywhere in the world relatively quickly and maintain a serious presence there for as long as they want... Russias navy can't do that to anything like the same extent. A couple of carriers will allow that but they will never give them the capacity to fight the US let alone NATO on equal terms at sea.
Very simply it will enable them to force their will in places like Venezuela because the US wont start WWIII over Venezuela no matter how attractive all that oil seems to be.
Of course if Russia starts trying to throw its weight around all over the place then the US might push back, so they need to pick and choose...
That is wishful thinking. The days of ICBMs being an effective deterrent are quickly coming to an end. Like everything, technology becomes obsolete and so will ballistic missiles. It isn't a matter of if but a matter of when.
For every measure there is a countermeasure. ATGMs don't make tanks or armour useless but you need the correct tactics to make them effective.
The AH-64 Apache is a potent platform but if you just fly into enemy airspace without caring what defences are around you are going to lose aircraft... especially when it seems that even small arms fire can penetrate their cockpit canopies...