[Poohbah]

Well, there never is a war without human casualty, But if one can minimize it in this PC world(dominated by the UN), we may gain some points with the liberals in the world, which outnumber us 10 to one specially in EU, and Africa.

Generally, the USAF doesn't like EMP because it's not a precise, easily measured and calibrated weapon. A bomb can be modeled much more accurately.

[Jake0001]

I could see that. Having to make sure that all of our own aircraft and ground forces are out of range would be a logistic mess unless used during the very first strike.

There were scientists back in the 1940's who were afraid that detonating a nuke in the atmosphere could ignite the atmosphere. Fortunately they were wrong and it didn't happen.....

What if they detonate one of these untested devices and the effect hits a 1000 mile radius instead 100? Something to think about while waiting in line for gasoline at $10 a gallon perhaps? Of course I could be wrong, wouldn't be the first or last time.

[desertcry]

USAF doesn't like EMP..... Well, if we have it, now is the time to gather data, and familiarity with the weapon in actual combat situation. We can always use traditional ordinance, if we find the results unsatisfactory. I may soumd cold, and calculating, but WAR IS HELL, and I remember 9.11 only too well. We should never allow it to happen again.