Posted on 03/07/2012 6:39:49 AM PST by Strategy
That said, cratering effects are at work, and essentially the solution to a bunker too deep to get to is to keep hitting it. But that's where the limited number of MOP's, and their cost, comes into play. Still, per Heinlein:
"Man, I don't think we had better hit that mountain again."
"Why not, Mike?"
"It's not there any longer."
Now, if we had listened to Heinlein regarding space policy, Iran's bunkers would be a relatively easy problem to solve. We could, literally, "throw rocks at them." And they could not stop us.
BTW: None of that, as I have described it generally, is in any way classified intel. I suppose that some of the details to which I am not privy, are. :-)
You are correct. I was part of BOTH campaigns. All services need each other though. Ground units would be decimated without air cover, our forces have not had to fight a major conflict in the last 60 years without air supremacy.
However, you can never replace boots on the ground if you actually want the territory.
Airpower is great at punishing enemy on the ground. I was present for some interrogations after Gulf War I and the Iraqis were terrified of our Air Force. The ones that survived had to watch most of their buddies blow up a few at a time with no warning at all. Very demoralizing for the folks on the receiving end.
The Iraqis also hated the MLRS from the Army. They got a glazed look in their eyes when they spoke about it. They called it a name that basically translated to “steel rain”.
Airpower is a force of its own, now, and no longer just a supporting force to a ground campaign.
Sometimes the Air Force leads, sometimes not.
The Army/ground forces, are not always the lead component anymore. Sometimes airpower will be the lead, like Gulf War I, and sometimes the ground campaign leads. . .such as in the “stan” as you call it.
The facts in the article are undisputed and accurate.
The “Chinese Embassy” was a communication node that was actually being used as a hub to route enemy communications.
The selection of that target was done by the CIA, so, the USAF had no role in determining if it was placed on the Master Target List.
JWAC assessed the BDA and the attack went as planned.
Blame the CIA, but then again, if not, okay, then I blame the Army for shooting journalists that film from hotel balconies and are misidentified as holding RPGs. See? Intel in not exact.
Complicating everything in Kosovo was Gen Clark, US Army.
He demanded a specific number of targets, not targets with any value. Just numbers so he could say, “We bombed ‘X’ amount of targets today,” regardless if they actually had any effect. That is why many bombs were dropped and missiles fired. . .at targets that held no strategic value.
And we can't forget Wild Bill Cody, US Army, and his Apache fiasco in theater at that time. Apache's are airpower, you know, and he mucked up the deployment and preparation for employment so much so he (they) were pulled.
Gen Clark, US Army, was a typical tactical officer with no clue about strategic targeting and weapons effects. Gen Cody was cartoonish in his ego.
The some total of all our efforts in Kosovo/Balkans is best put by General Mackezie when he said,"We bombed the wrong side."
Don't think I'll defend Wesley Clark either, who wanted to attack the Russians at Pristina.
We're getting side-tracked here. Back to Iran...If we hit Iran we better do so with such massive force, so rapid as to really and truly "shock and awe" them. They have assets in Venezuela,Nicaragua, Europe, and just about every damned country in the world. Waiting to be unleashed.
Other than a serious nuking, I think all else fails. And we simply are unwilling, as a nation to do so...
The recent war in Libya pretty much backs up what you say. The “rebels or Freedom Fighters” would have been crushed at Benghazi after Ghadaffi’s forces drove them east with armor/arty, had it not been for NATO aerial intervention. Yet, to drive them back and ultimately prevail, the rebels had to mount ground attacks. Costly for all concerned and the country got trashed...
Whack ‘em hard and fast. . .totally agree.
RE:Post 66-some=sum.
Works for me...
What’s missing in this story is that Israel could have the the military equipment if they would promise not to use it until after November 7 voting day.
Google “qanat”
Ancient Persians started civilizations first tunnels, 7th century BC:
http://www.waterhistory.org/histories/qanats/
Iran taught the world how to dig. They still have 170,000 miles of underground water conduits.
Hmmm ..?? I remember Israel purchasing lots of bunker busters some time ago.
So, unless there has been a great improvement in that type of weapon, causing Israel to need the improved version, I suspect Israel could have plenty of ammo to use against Iran.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.