Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
Get on the fifty! |
I'm wondering why they didn't crater that runway? "Pickin' stones and pullin' teats is a hard way to make a living. But, sure as God's got sandals, it beats fightin' dudes with treasure trails." "We've been tricked, we've been backstabbed, and we've been quite possibly, bamboozled." | |||
|
Official Space Nerd |
Military ops are supposed to be planned/conducted according to what specific effect the planners are hoping for. It was called 'effects-based planning,' when I was taking part in this sort of thing. I don't know what effect the planners were hoping for here, so I can't speculate on why they left the runway (which, by the way, is a LOT easier to fix than hardened aircraft shelters and whatever was inside them). As an example of this effects-based planning, during one of our desert forays (OIF, I think?), we hit some small but key power distribution nodes, effectively shutting off commercial power in Baghdad. A critic complained that the main power station was intact, to which the briefing officer simply replied "but the lights are off in Baghdad." In that case, I believe the power station was left intact in order to make the post-war transition, under US/Coalition control, easier. It was a LOT easier to fix the relatively simple nodes than the complex power station with all the specialized machinery that made it work. So, the strikes against the nodes were done because a) we wanted the power off in Baghdad, and b) we wanted to make post-war clean-up easier for us. After we moved in and took over, it a lot quicker and easier to repair/replace these nodes, so power was back in a matter of days/weeks instead of months, had we destroyed the power station. I recall another example during Desert Storm, I believe. There was overhead imagery of a bridge that we bombed. The photo simply showed a destroyed bridge over a dry riverbed. People mocked the 'stupidity' of the military, since anybody could simply drive around the bridge and get back on the road. What the imagery didn't show was comm or power lines running THROUGH the bridge structure. These lines were the target, not the bridge. They were apparently buried, so we didn't know exactly where they were, except when they emerged from the ground to run through the bridge structure, hence the reason for bombing the 'bridge to nowhere.' So, it's not always readily apparent from imagery why we strike certain targets. It often takes a more detailed and nuanced analysis to determine intent. . . Fear God and Dread Nought Admiral of the Fleet Sir Jacky Fisher | |||
|
Info Guru |
 https://twitter.com/realDonald...s/850785347038576640 “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” - John Adams | |||
|
Unflappable Enginerd |
Each Arleigh Burke destroyer, depending on the flight level(model), has either 90 or 96 "cells" which can be loaded with a mix of different missiles. You can load out with AA(Anti-air), ASW(Anti-sub), ASM(Anti-ship), or TLAM(surface to surface) in varying combinations. Within TLAM there are several subgroups of possible warhead loads with the 1k pound HE being the most common, as well as an anti-ship variant. My guess is that they pretty much expended most of their TLAM load out, but I'm not privy to what they are actually provisioned for. They, 2 destroyers, are also not our only assets in the region though. They really need to be pier-side to reload the cells, crane and stable deck surface, unless a lot has changed since my time in the service... I was in missile fire control when I was in, but that was a while back. ETA: To elaborate, the missiles come in prepackaged canisters which are loaded into the cells. It's possible to reload underway, supposedly, but not preferred. __________________________________ NRA Benefactor I lost all my weapons in a boating, umm, accident. http://www.aufamily.com/forums/ | |||
|
| Official Space Nerd |
There is supposedly a sign at the Flight Ops desk at Offutt AFB that states "There is no justifiable reason to fly through a thunderstorm in peacetime." I assume the same concept applies here. They CAN do it, but likely won't unless the S has really HTF. Too many risks involved in normal peacetime ops, I assume. They will likely be swapped out by two DDGs with a full missile complement, and return to base to restock their depleted stocks. On a slightly related note, I haven't heard anything for the past 24 hours about the single Ruskie frigate transiting the Bosporus towards 'the general vicinity of the 2 US Destroyers.'. . I guess we dodged WWIII. Fear God and Dread Nought Admiral of the Fleet Sir Jacky Fisher | |||
|
Member |
Thanks to you and SigMonkey for the explanations. I had wondered if maybe they only had a few firing tubes and thus had to fire a few, reload, and fire again, sort of like torpedoes in the old movies. Sound like that is not the case. Collecting dust. | |||
|
| Official Space Nerd |
Why would we punish them for shooting something down over THEIR territory? I would assume the drone, being the expendable asset that it is, will be written off and another launched tomorrow. A drone flying over SYRIAN territory isn't anywhere near like a manned OR unmanned aircraft flying over international waters. . .
Nope. Nope. Nope. I don't want ANY of those people to have MANPADS (MAN-Portable Air Defense System). I don't trust ANY of them with anything more than small arms (and not even that much in some cases); they would likely sell them to an arms broker and we would soon see a commercial airliner shot down over Qatar, Saudi, or France. Fear God and Dread Nought Admiral of the Fleet Sir Jacky Fisher | |||
|
Member |
Obama set that bar so low, you could ice skate over it. . | |||
|
Member |
This columnist just said what lots of folks think, but haven't said. https://townhall.com/columnist...about-syria-n2310799 Most of the world is upset about Syria’s use of chemical weapons against their own people – and it should be. It was yet another act of evil, and Bashar al-Assad is a monster. The world will be a better place without him. But let’s not pretend anyone is going to do anything to facilitate that. President Donald Trump’s “targeted” bombing of the airfield from which the latest chemical attack was launched might stop chemical weapons from being used for a while, but it won’t stop the slaughter in Syria. Because, although no one is willing to say it, the world doesn’t care. That’s not to say people aren’t bothered. Children gasping for air is a visual that moves all but a few. Still, what happens in Syria to Syrians doesn’t affect the rest of the world in any tangible way. Therefore people are not moved to act. If they were, there would be a flood into Syria to join the rebels fighting both Assad and ISIS. As it is, millions of Syrians aren’t even willing to stand up for their fellow countrymen, as able-bodied men flee the country rather than fight for themselves. Since those in the firing line don’t seem to care, the rest of the world isn’t willing to do what is necessary to prevent what happened this week from happening again. If it were, one of the roughly dozen previous chemical attacks would’ve caused action beyond bombing an airstrip. It didn’t. The world likes to be seen denouncing monsters and their inhuman actions, but it doesn’t like actually doing anything about it unless forced. And the world is rarely forced to act in a meaningful way on matters of the actions of monsters. The disaster in Syria is not the fault of the Trump administration. The Obama administration ignored multiple chemical weapons attacks by Assad because it was politically advantageous to do nothing. The media played along, casually mentioning the attacks happened – sometimes – and quickly moving on to the latest update on a Kardashian or some such distraction. After his red line was obliterated by Assad, President Obama balked. He wasn’t necessarily wrong to do nothing; he was wrong to draw the line if he wasn’t willing to back it up. And he wasn’t willing. Eventually he cut a deal for Syria to give up its “declared” chemical weapons, congratulated himself and went golfing. They never cared about Syria, but they had to be seen as caring about Syria. The deal gave them exactly that. From a policy standpoint, I’m not sure that was wrong. Horrible things happen all the time. The civilized world can’t act simply because something horrific happened. But we should probably stop pretending to be surprised when they do. When it comes to humanitarian crises that require more than money to address, we aren’t interested. People would rather text some number to donate a couple of bucks to a cause so they can feel good about themselves than do anything tangible. It’s a normal human reaction – if it doesn’t affect them directly, they’re not really wrong to. By next week, the worldwill have moved on to something else. But it’s not next week yet. The bombs just flew, so we have politicians and journalists mounting their high horses and patting themselves on their backs for caring and others condemning the action as unlawful. Everyone falls in line behind whatever suits their political needs, and nothing changes. We – every one of us – have to pretend to be outraged by awfulness. We have to pretend to be angry over action or inaction. We have to pretend to be saddened by unspeakable acts. But the truth, deep down, is something different. What happened in Syria is horrible, but it’s not unique. The world sat idly by when it happened in Syria before – as the bodies piled up in Darfur, as untold numbers were slaughtered in Rwanda and countless other places. Why should this time be any different? When nearly 300 girls were kidnapped and forced into sex slavery by Boko Haram, the civilized world uniformly expressed outrage. To combat this evil act…a hashtag was launched: #BringBackOurGirls. Social media was flooded by people wanting to be seen caring. Soon after, people moved on. Most of the girls are still missing, and the world didn’t do a damn thing that mattered. The world only cares to be seen caring; acting is of no interest. Do you think the Russian government gives a damn about a chemical weapons attack? That China lost sleep over genocide anywhere? It may be immoral for the world to watch genocide and not act, but it is the world’s default position. If the great powers of the world really wanted to, they could wipe out ISIS and Assad and stop almost every atrocity. It would require a resolve it hasn’t shown and serious, unfettered military action. The current political climate of the West won’t allow it. Civilian casualties would be high and domestic support would collapse. We want to be heroes, but we want it to be neat. Like in the movies. But war isn’t neat. If World War 2 happened today, the West would be passing resolutions condemning Germany and Japan, the Jews would be eliminated and nation after nation would fall to tyranny. I don’t know what the answer is, but I know it’s not bombing an airfield or pretending a problem doesn’t exist. It lies somewhere in between and not with those who feel good about themselves for feeling bad for others. Maybe the first step is admitting that. --------------------- DJT-45/47 MAGA !!!!! "Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it." — Mark Twain “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” — H. L. Mencken | |||
|
| Freethinker |
Things were not that much different then. Did anyone even bother with a condemnation when Japan invaded China? What did the world do when Italy attacked Ethiopia or when Germany marched into Austria or Czechoslovakia? And let’s not forget the Soviet Union’s assault on Finland. In addition, it was more than a little ironic that Britain and France decided to finally go to war with Germany because despotic Poland was invaded, but didn’t have too much to say to the Soviets when they grabbed their share of the spoils from the other direction. Then there was the invasion (again by the Russians) of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia not long after which again no one was too concerned about (albeit not too surprisingly as it happened in 1940, but still …). In fact, I grew up learning that it was the later Allied powers’ initial feckless response to all that aggression that convinced Hitler that he could keep going with impunity. There was a time when even the Left understood that (assuming it was Nazis we were fighting), but that was then and this is now. All we must do is offer a (dummy) “Reset” button, admit our transgressions, and all will be hunky dory. Some lessons must be learned over and over. My sincere best wishes to the generations after mine. ► 6.4/93.6 ___________ “We are Americans …. Together we have resisted the trap of appeasement, cynicism, and isolation that gives temptation to tyrants.” — George H. W. Bush | |||
|
| Member |
Plus we may need that flight line later. Not saying that needs to happen but a leader not only looks at the direct effect but looks at the 2nd and 3rd order of those effects, plan beyond your enemy's plan. | |||
|
Ball Haulin' |
Really? This thread had promise.... -------------------------------------- "There are things we know. There are things we dont know. Then there are the things we dont know that we dont know." | |||
|
| Peace through superior firepower  |
If you're looking to be banned, ridiculous rants like this will do it. If you can't find a way to express yourself beyond stringing together a bunch of profanity, then don't bother posting. Any fool can hurl a bunch of meaningless insults. Behave or be gone. ____________________________________________________ "I am your retribution." - Donald Trump, speech at CPAC, March 4, 2023 | |||
|
Member |
It still does. I'm sure continuing 'intelligent' commentary will be forthcoming as this thing continues to roll forward and evolve. ----------------------------- Guns are awesome because they shoot solid lead freedom. Every man should have several guns. And several dogs, because a man with a cat is a woman. Kurt Schlichter | |||
|
Still finding my way |
And another dork goes on my ignore list. Wow. | |||
|
| Peace through superior firepower |
Cool it | |||
|
| Too old to run, too mean to quit! |
Damn! Who pissed in your cheerios? According to my admittedly failing memory, I have NEVER seen such an amazingly bad taste and understanding post. I am all for discussion, but your response is not in the vein of discussion, it is simply a personal attack. And, as such, in my opinion has little place here. Para, if I am treading on your territory, sorry. Elk There has never been an occasion where a people gave up their weapons in the interest of peace that didn't end in their massacre. (Louis L'Amour) "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical. " -Thomas Jefferson "America is great because she is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great." Alexis de Tocqueville FBHO!!! The Idaho Elk Hunter | |||
|
Chip away the stone |
Who are these friends you speak of? Do you have assurances they're all the kind of friends who won't later use those (presumably) US-supplied weapons against us or our allies? Where do they stand on murder and suicide bombings in "defense" of their faith? Would they like to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, perchance? Would some of them shoot our own soldiers in the back when they become disillusioned with us? Admittedly I don't know much about the various factions fighting Assad, but "the enemy of my enemy" strategy isn't automatically a good one. | |||
|
| Peace through superior firepower |
MOVE ON I certainly hope that the next person who posts to this thread is not suffering from a reading comprehension issue. Move on | |||
|
| Mired in the Fog of Lucidity |
You knew this would happen at some point. The useless crowd with nothing better to do than be offended for others, that aren't themselves offended, speaks out. I wonder how Elizabeth Warren feels about the subject? Prominent Editor Mocked For Saying ‘Tomahawk Missiles’ Are Offensive to Native Americans https://heatst.com/culture-war...to-native-americans/ | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
© SIGforum 2024