[eno_]

Now compare that kind of firepower to what a squad can hump in on its backs, or even what a batallion of mobile howizters and its supply chain can provide. And the howizters move at 50mph (best case) versus 500mph (all conditions) for the bomber. JDAMs and tactical air support plus special forces with combat air controllers look to be the way wars are fought now.

[FreeAtlanta]

I still think artillery is necessary for quick continuous response. If, however, the drones get beefed up and we can keep a few hundred over the battlefield at all times, then maybe artillery isn't needed as much.... but, what if we face an enemy with who has a viable laser defence? Artillery might be the only thing that could hit him.

[NerdDad]

I believe you are correct and thankfully so. The lib press will decry the dehumanization of the way we fight wars now because they won't be able to turn the sheeple against the effort in the say way they did in VN. Having been in the AF (peace time desk weenie) and with a son preparing for a career as an AF pilot, I'm delighted to have our guys out of harm's way. The idea is to fight a war on your terms--press be damned. And a word about those combat air controllers--BALLS. Great big, massive, brass whoppers. Nothing but the utmost respect for those guys who are out in front of the front line. Still waiting to hear about the MOH recommendation for the controller in Afghan.

[astounded]

Bombs guided by SOF do appear to be the way we go now. But, all that fancy hardware is useless without the highly trained soldiers needed to operate it. We cannot turn out the highest quality SOF soldiers overnight. It takes years to train a SEAL and we lost some in Afghanistan - these men are priceless military assets that have to be employed sensibly and carefully. We cannot do another Iwo Jima now.