How is it cheaper to run sorties from a carrier battle group than an airport? A squadron of F-22 is overkill but a carrier isn't? What are these additional costs you are even talking about? I am either completely lost in your point, or your logic is insane. This is an a discussion (as I barely understand it) of deployment, not acquisition. So what are you saying? The A10 supports ground troops, this is not the role for it at all.
Actually no Syria doesn't have some of the best anti-air systems the Russians can crank out. From the article I posted above: [rquoter]A true test of a worthy aircraft is a worthy adversary, a label that does not quite apply to Syria. Syria's air defense forces have had one brief period of glory, when a thick network of Soviet-made surface-to-air missiles and anti-aircraft guns took a sharp toll of unprepared Israeli aircraft in 1973. Since then, the Israeli air force has repeatedly bombed Syria without loss, including a 2007 strike on a nuclear site and Hezbollah-bound missiles in 2013. The Syrian government was reportedly warned in advance of the U.S. strikes. Yet even if Damascus had objected, it couldn't have done that much to stop it. Most of its anti-aircraft weapons are Cold War-era designs. The Syrian government for years has been trying to upgrade its defenses--looking specifically to purchase the advanced S-300 anti-aircraft missile system from Russia. But challenging F-22s, let alone older F-15 and F-16s, requires an integrated air defense system of radars, communications links, weapons and command centers. With the Syrian military racked by losses and desertions from fighting a brutal war against rebels armed with Kalashnikovs and rocket launchers, air defense is probably not their highest priority. While much depends on which aircraft attacked which ISIS targets, the fact is that most of the attacking aircraft were older platforms, including U.S. and Arab F-15s, F-16s, F-18s and B-1s. They did so without loss, which suggests that the F-22 wasn't really needed over Syria. If it was, then one wonders how most of the U.S. Air Force would fare over North Korea or other nations.[/rquoter] Again this is why our military is so bloated that these systems become self-justifying. As former DOD secretary Gates noted none of our enemies, not the Russians, not the Chinese, are close to approaching the capabilities of the F-22. Everything the F-22 can do can already be done by other jets within the US arsenal. The main use of the F-22 does seem more like the military putting on a show to justify the furthering of the 5th generation fighter program. One other issue about why I don't think it's a good idea to use the F-22 for a mission like this. While the F-22 is unmatched no doubt the Russians and Chinese are very interested in learning about it's. By deploying it over hostile territory gives our rivals a chance to learn much more about it than they would just from air shows. I'm sure the Russians are hitting up the Syrians to get all of their radar data from the airstrikes to see what they can learn from that. Also heaven forbid an F-22 happens to crash from enemy fire or other reasons. That would be a coup for ISIS or the Assad and one they could sell to the Chinese and Russians for a ton of money. Remember the Chinese got hold of a part of the US stealth helicopter from the OBL raid and also got to dismantle a US EP-3 from the Hainan incident. No doubt they've figured out tons of intel from those. There's a solid argument that a stealth helicopter was needed in the OBL mission. There isn't such a need for F-22's to bomb ISIS.
Because a carrier group is designed to be mobile and flexible projection of power. When we don't need it in that region we move it. Further as was shown during the tsunami is that a carrier group also can be used for providing many other functions than just as a military platform. A land based squadron of F-22's is very specific and takes longer to move the planes along with setting up their support staff and facilities. Granted they were there already but I still question the need for f-22's in the region in the first place. The F-22 is the most expensive fighter plane ever built and likely the most expensive to operate it's not that difficult to figure out that it is more expensive to use and maintain than other fighters that have a long service record. What is so hard to understand that weapons systems like the F-22 are overkill in regard to this type of mission? You claim to be the weaponry expert so I don't know if you're just being deliberately obtuse here to not understand that using a weapon for a mission when other more cheaper ones and more appropriate ones are available are going to be more cost effective. Would you recommend using a .50 cal. machine gun to hunt squirrels? This is basically what this is. As part of close air support it is designed to attack infantry and armored ground targets which is exactly what we are doing. The F-22 can do that but it's primary purpose is an air superiority fighter. Given that ISIS has no fighters there is no point to that.
So is the F18. So is the F22 really. Stealth opens the net, the old planes fly through the holes. Without the stealth, the old planes would be chewed up. These are two sentences that say the complete opposite thing.
I don't even see how it is possible you think this is true. Jets are faster than ships, even nuclear powered ships. Did you miss where I said additional costs? Unless you are advocating the scrapping or mothballing of the F22's I don't see the point you are making. This is a deployment argument right, not acquisition? A carrier isn't cheaper. I'm honestly blown away you think I am the one being obtuse. No it isn't. You are saying you think our pilots should be using a compass because they don't use electricity even though thousands of pilots are just using a GPS we have already paid for to get around the base at home. Support of ground troops is a completely different mission. When we put in ground troops, we might also see A10's. Outside of having a huge gun the A10 is worse at accurately putting bombs on target than the F18, and WAY worse than the F22.
Hey it is truly amazing the way the folks running the country can turn on the media to flip and lead the sheep to intense fear and follow. About a year ago the public was war weary and not to eager to start a new war on Syria. Poor bandwagoner. He real is a band wagoner. Perhaps he somehow realizes this. Price is no object when it comes to killing ISIS members. He is so scared. Anything to relieve his anxiety. Now as to ROI. It is an excellent almost perfect ROI for the defense industry. The more they shoot off $2 million dollar tomahawk (nice name so warrior like !!) missiles the more terrorists they produce so the more $2 million cruise missiles needed. Some of the relatives of the often times innocednt citizens will be so pissed they will call themselves ISIS or Al Qaeda or the latest Korasalians sp?. Even better many of this cool military stuff is produced at a cost plus basis with only one or two producers and only Uncle Sam as the buyer. Classic free market capitalism to the believers. As Bin Laden said Al Qaeda and I suppose China and others are laughing their asses off as we keep diverting resources from human and physical infratstructure toward blowing up crap in the desert.
Glynch is right. If it wasn't for our war machine then the perfectly rational people who now call themselves ISIS/ISIL/IS wouldn't be running around beheading innocent civilians, women, children and media members or crucifying Christian minorities, or massacring entire towns of other religious minorities, or raping teenage girls that are not part of their sect of Islam, or gunning down cars on the road to kill their passengers...nope, if not for the US those perfectly rational people would be eating their dinner right alongside each other working to build a better tomorrow.
You are very gullible. Been played again. Gunning for Iraq War III you are. My advice. Stick to yellow ribbons, but don't volunteer for you family's sake. A bit too nuanced to the ISIS omg !! crapping in the pants folks or those for whom , no price too high. ISIS are bad guys but it doesn't follow that bombing them and pretending there is no collateral damage or no more terrorists created. Doesn't follow that they are an existential threat to the US or you in front of your tv computer monitor. Hey if you are really that concerned, be brave enough to support some of the steps below. The politicians won't as their opponents will be lavishly funded if they cross the arms industry and other lobbies that like the status quo. 1) Cut off arms to their buds the Saudis and the Qataris sp? and other backers. Better yet as 80% a change and mistype of all the arms on both sides are made bu us cut them all off. Put sanctions in place against the Germans, the Israelis, French, Swedes, Brits or whoever else sells them arms. Work out a deal with Russia to stop, too or sanction them if you think that would help. 2 Apologize to the entire world, but especially the Arab World and rebuild Iraq. Pay reparations. How bout a trillion better spent than on ISIS. Refer Bush and Cheney to the Hague. Show we really have changed our ways. 3) Cut off arms to the Israelis and make them behave. There are things you can do besides bombing-- including civilians all too often.
LOL Glynch. Holy crap that was an awesomely funny post. If evil America would just kill itself, the world would be singing hand in hand. Lennon's dream would come true! Can't you just imagine Glynch? A world with no America and no Jews????!!!!!
Imagine there's no America It's easy if you try No Jews in Palestine They could leave or die Imagine all the people living without America... Imagine there's no West It isn't hard to do No one to kill the peaceful Muslims And no Christians too Imagine all the people living without the Jews... You may say Glynch is a dreamer but he's not the only one he hopes for the end of Israel so the world can live as one
He didn't advocate for it, he just hates everything about America. Something as horrible as the America Glynch sees is better off dead.
Crude rhetoric like this should make American Jews wary that folks who grew up in families and parts of American famous for hating Jews and African Americans are are now the big defenders of Israel as it turns ever more right wing..
The America that you support, which killed roughly a million Iraqis for no good reason and remains largely unapologetic for this major crime against humanity deserves "to die" to use your rhetoric. Just like the America that supported Jim Crow deserved "to die" using your rhetoric" Sadly I have to explain this for you. This does not mean that I want to have the United States broken up and occupied by ISIS or the UN or even Canada. I don't want to kill all Americans or imprison them or treat them like defeated Japan or Nazi Germany. I like the line from a Neil Young song. "America is beautiful, but is has an ugly side" Too nuanced for you, but what the hell for others.
So, glynch says to sanctions the Western Europeans for "selling arms"....but in Russia's case, he's willing to work out a deal first. Pretty much shows his priorities right there.
I frankly consider them to not fit into the western left-right framework. Israel to the extent it remains a part of the general western world does and is clearly becoming more right-- making it the darling of right wingers in the western world. Trying to analyze islamists in the left-right continuum. I am using islamists to mean the backward version of Islam pushed by largely rural uneducated dare I say culturally impoverished folks who guys like ATW try to paint as inherent to Islam, which is about as fair as painting the followers of Musolini's Christianity as the defining the characteristic of all Christianity. Similarly it would be unfair to paint the increasing facistic Judaism of many in Israel as being emblematic of the Jewish religion. Let's see: Poor on women's rights. More right than left Religion should dominate all aspects of life More right than left Free speech (not the corporate Hobby Lobby version) More right than left Dracaonian levels of punishment for crime More right than left Strict obedience to authority More right than left.
