#1 Top Two Weapons In US Campaign Against ISIS Both Cancelled By Obama09-28-2014, 01:20 PM
Surprise, surprise! ...
A fact not loss (read ... word "lost" ~ ABC) on administration critics and military planners is that at least two key weapons programs cancelled by President Obama to much fanfare have proven central, even vital, to the American-led campaign to “degrade and destroy” the Islamic State and other terror targets inside Syria.
The first night’s assault wave against terror targets in Syria included the firing of at least 47 Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from the state-of-the-art Aegis class guided missile destroyer USS Arleigh; part of the George H.W. Bush carrier task force.It was just last March that President Obama ordered the Defense Department to phase out new purchases of Tomahawk cruise missiles, forcing the Navy to relying upon only an ever-dwindling inventory, until the program ceases completely in 2016.
In the first night alone of air operations against Syrian based terror targets, the Pentagon fired off nearly half the number of missiles its pared back purchase program permits for all of next year.
If deployed at that rate continuously, the US stockpile of roughly 4,000 Tomahawks would be depleted in less than three months.This above all: to thine own self be true, and it must follow, as the night the day, thou canst not then be false to any man.
~ William Shakespeare
09-28-2014, 02:22 PM
From the looks of some of these mangy bastards we could probably scare a lot of them back into their caves with soap and water.
- Join Date
- Apr 2014
09-29-2014, 01:34 PM
Maybe I've missed something, but is the name of the destroyer the USS Arleigh Burke, which is also the class for destroyers of that class? And are destroyers equipped with Aegis? I thought cruisers were.SVPete
Envy is Greed's bigger, more evil, twin.
Those who can, do.
Those who know, teach.
Ignorant incapables, regulate.
09-29-2014, 03:39 PM
There is another dimension to the Tomahawk usage, which is that under treaty we only have a small and highly-accountable number that we are allowed to count as nuke-rated, i.e. on which we can legally put nuclear weapons; as I recall, Clintoon blew some of them for his futile attack on Bin Laden's empty camp, which pissed off the people in defense who actually understood it at the time.
As far as the F22 goes, that's really a rather silly and opportunistic point by the people who want to see it restored to production. That may or may not be a good idea in the general sense, but in a war against terrorists or rogue states, it's about as necessary as roller skates.
The bird is a MiG29 killer, an air superiority/air dominance aircraft with 'Some' capability to perform air-to-ground attack. None of the target powers in such a conflict have anything flying that will keep all those pre-F22 aircraft - F15s, F16s, and F/A18s - off their backs. Hell, with PGMs, we could be using B47s for all the difference the F22 technology would make in that kind of conflict. We're already pouring money into vast overruns on the F35, which is supposed to be the F22's companion strike aircraft ('Strike' being the much-more-fashionable word for 'Air to ground attack' these days)...unless there is a state-of-the-art air-to-air threat, there's no rational reason to also buy a lot of also-extremely-expensive F22s for a war on Third World forces.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|