« 4/20 Frago | Main | The A-10 Upgrade Isn't Magic »

April 20, 2007


John F. MacMichael

"...failing to replace the fighters of today without providing resources to perform their missions-must not be an option."

Unfortunately, it is an option; a stupid and short-sighted option to be sure but that certainly does not mean that it will not be the option chosen.

As to your point that "...it is an equivalent mistake to assume all future wars will be the same as the current conflict." you are completely on target. My favorite example of this fallacy was in a letter to the editor of Armed Forces Journal after Operation Just Cause in Panama. The writer pointed out that we had used none of our then shiny new Abrams tanks in Panama and that we had used the 82nd Airborne's obsolescent Sheridan light tanks. These facts, he asserted, PROVED that the whole Abrams program had been a colossal waste of money and that we would never again see a combat role for the main battle tank. Unfortunately for this pontificator, just a few months later we had the first Gulf War featuring some of the largest armored battles since WWII.

Of course, it would be nice if we did have decent light tank in our inventory.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Current Issue

Blog powered by Typepad

Ares Photos

  • Riot 1
    Check out exclusive photos from Defense Technology International for a preview of upcoming stories, including: * Australian Army equips for stability ops * Army upgrades paratroopers * New A-10s!