To: neverdem; AFPhys; CholeraJoe; george76
Right - It would be better if they were “new” B-52’s - or even better - B’1’s! - than just a single sqdn change.
By the way, doesn’t further “consolidation” into fewer bases mean even MORE vulnerability to a drive-by (Iranian/Russian/Chinese/NK) nuclear truck bomb? ?
51 posted on
09/04/2009 11:19:19 AM PDT by
Robert A Cook PE
(I can only donate monthly, but socialists' ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
To: Robert A. Cook, PE
They wouldn’t even be able to find Minot.
It is even further out in the sticks than nothing.
54 posted on
09/04/2009 11:38:05 AM PDT by
AFPhys
((Praying for our troops, our citizens, that the Bible and Freedom become basis of the US law again))
To: Robert A. Cook, PE
Right - It would be better if they were “new” B-52’s - or even better - B’1’s! - than just a single sqdn change.
Personally I would take the B-52s - outstanding uptime and a much more versatile platform over the B-1s.
To: Robert A. Cook, PE; george76
62 posted on
09/04/2009 6:13:39 PM PDT by
neverdem
(Xin loi minh oi)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson