[Dreamtwister]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Free', 'B')ut with the cold look of rationality in the end it all comes down to the net return for the huge cost. Is it really better to have one superior fighter if you could get a hundred ok-fighters for the same money?

[Free]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dreamtwister', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Free', 'B')ut with the cold look of rationality in the end it all comes down to the net return for the huge cost. Is it really better to have one superior fighter if you could get a hundred ok-fighters for the same money?

[Zardoz]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mekrob', 'N')othing that (mainly) bombers and missiles can't take care of.

[Tyler_JC]

Well, how many of these things do you actually need? A couple hundred?

It's not like we're going to throw our the current batch of fighters just because we got this new toy.

My share of each F-22 built is roughly 50 cents.

I'm willing to pay for a couple hundred of them if it means that our enemies think twice before provoking a conflict.

I think you will find that most Americans are more than willing to pay the cost of these expensive weapons because they make us feel safer.

The goal of modern warfare is to wipe out the enemies airbases before the war starts, that way they never get the chance to send up anything to challenge your air superiority.

I believe the purpose of this new fighter is to take out anything that manages to survive our first saturation bombing run.

[Free]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Zardoz', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mekrob', 'N')othing that (mainly) bombers and missiles can't take care of.

[PenultimateManStanding]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Zardoz', '
')Cost? Who cares? It's only fiat money. It's all just a big scam anyway. A short printing press run and your shiny new F-22 is "paid for".

[Dreamtwister]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Free', 't')he battle of Agincourt

[Free]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dreamtwister', '
')I think what we are really discussing here is the thermodynamics of warfare. Weapons systems with low opportunity cost will always eventually triumph over sophistication, because of the energy investment required to construct, field and maintain those advanced weapon systems.

...

The complex exposes itself to maximum risk for minimum benefit, whereas the simple has minimum risk for maximum payoff. The complex has to be effective many many times before damage can be measured, but the simple needs only be effective once.

[Tyler_JC]

Well, I think we all know what the endgame for air warfare is and we also know that we don't like to think about it...

Does anyone actually think the United States is destroying its stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction?

Why send helicopter or a platoon of soldiers into a village when a white phosphorus bomb or a napalm barrage works even better?

Who needs to win hearts and minds when you can just as easily splatter them

The United States might have stopped producing biological weapons in the 1970s but is there any doubt that we could restart the program in a matter of weeks if the president demanded it?

We don't follow the Geneva Convention with regards to our POWs in Gitmo, why should we follow the Biological Weapons Convention or the Chemical Weapons Convention?

I worry about the day that we actually take the gloves off...

[kabu]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', '
')I worry about the day that we actually take the gloves off...

[PenultimateManStanding]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kabu', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', '
')I worry about the day that we actually take the gloves off...

[Jack]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'i')t's bound to happen when gas gets tight. the mantra will be: Nuke 'em, Get The Oil!

[PenultimateManStanding]

I don't think Americans will wait that long, Jack. It's going to become apparent that that is where we are headed and the public will demand action long before the lights go out is my guess.

[smallpoxgirl]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', 'T')o confront the F-22-led “Blue Air” collection, the joint force mustered its best “Red Air” threat—front-line F-15s, F-16s, and Navy F/A-18 Super Hornets. The F-22’s team blitzed the opposition with a favorable 241-to-two kill ratio.

[Tyler_JC]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', 'T')o confront the F-22-led “Blue Air” collection, the joint force mustered its best “Red Air” threat—front-line F-15s, F-16s, and Navy F/A-18 Super Hornets. The F-22’s team blitzed the opposition with a favorable 241-to-two kill ratio.

[smallpoxgirl]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', 'T')hink about it, why would we ever need to send troop convoys across hostile territory when we could rather horrifically "pacify" any place under the sun?

[PenultimateManStanding]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '
')Last I heard we were getting our butts handed to us by a bunch of guys with a battery, a spool of wire, and some RDX they harvested out of a 50 year old artillery shell.

[Free]

Well I think you are mixing up two things here - basically there are two categories of possible contemporary war:

- All out war, no limits (total war in Goebbels language) - this IMHO automatically means total nuclear war, because we essentially live in a multipolar world with at least 3 MAD capable players.

If the all out war takes place between one of the MAD - players and one non-MAD player (in essence total genocide of a nation), this would automatically lead to pariah status of the MAD - player, a new cold war, and new spheres of influences (you are a no nuke country, you look for a big buddy who protects you and guarantees you don't get nuked)

- regionally limited war, proxy war. Like we see in Iraq. Going genocidal is not possible without serious repercussions and a new cold war (see above scenario). The result is automatically a status with which all combatants and MAD-players can live (Iraq war I) or an indefinite asymmetrical war (Iraq war II).

It's obvious that conventional military might only plays a limited role in total war- ICBMs, nuclear subs play it out, what remains is not worth contemplating.

So it all comes down to projecting military power in asymmetrical scenarios or proxy wars. And I think the limits of conventional hardware here have been demonstrated time after time again, recently in Lebanon, were one of the best tanks on the planet, the Merkava, has been defeated by a cheap but effective RPG.

[PenultimateManStanding]

It's not easy to see what is coming in terms of war. I wouldn't expect to see total war between major powers for reasons you mentioned, free, but it's not possible to know. But one thing I do think will change is this notion of "pariahs" and the role of public opinion. The entire psychology of the present will shift in ways that will astonish us all. That will occur after everyone realizes that we are in the oil age end-game, after everyone realizes that the energy situation is ugly and that it is absolutely not going to ever again be like it was. After everyone realizes that die-off is real time shit and underway. How that will play out with the nukes is something to think about. Maybe the biggest players will work things out based on mutual calculations. All guesswork of course, but it could very well be within a decade from now that we will know we're in the dark new era. Right now it's only stuff to speculate about.

[Free]

Yes I agree we can't know how this plays out, but the MAD-situation sort of makes the limits of possible scenarios.

That's why I think the most logical outcome is, as you said, a kind of spoken or unspoken agreement between the big powers, plus regionally limited proxy wars where spheres of influence are debated.

This will result in a competition for hearts and minds for the people within the spheres of influence (see cold war) - it just doesn't help if you have the image of a pariah nation there, although pariah-parameters can be flexible.

Look at China, buying energy and making treaties all over the world. To us they border on pariah, but for the Sudanese (another pariah nation) and others they are perfect, because they don't ask questions about human rights and such...