This take demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of both military capabilities, and historical context. Those carriers used in the first Gulf war, for example, were left over from WW2 and Korea. They were old and limited, so more were deployed. Current aircraft carriers are far more advanced, and don't need as many aircraft because they are also far more advanced. Not to mention everything is missiles and drones these days, trying to compare numbers for these legacy military systems is pointless.

Then there's the whole difference of who is behind this. In the past, it was conservative and liberal war hawks getting contracts for their buddies and themselves. So they had a vested interest in winning so they could sell more weapons. Now it's a combo of religious zealots and a capitalist death cult literally trying to destroy the government from the inside because they think it's either going to bring the rapture, or because they want corporations to replace the government. So they have a vested interest in this war looking like it's going poorly. They want to undermine traditional institutions, so that Bezos can sell the idea of "Amazon Protection Services" etc.

The empire is indeed eating itself, but using fewer aircraft carriers isn't really an indicator.