Why cheap air attack options do not replace missiles

Why not replace expensive cruise missiles with dumb bombs or wing-mounted guns?

Close-range attacks would expose aircraft to modern defences, and the Falklands showed why warships still needed systems that had been previously removed.

Dumb bombs and wing-mounted guns may cost less per weapon than cruise missiles, but they force an aircraft to approach a defended warship closely. A modern attacker making that run would probably face severe losses before delivering enough damage. The Falklands showed both that close-range attacks could succeed and that stripping apparently obsolete weapons from ships had created dangerous gaps, prompting rearmament afterward. Aircraft carriers can make guided-bomb attacks economical by recovering and reusing aircraft, but that does not erase the tactical value of stand-off missiles.