Surgical Air Strikes are BS

[konradv]

One of the reasons air power did no prevail in Nam was because we keep agreeing to cease fires and halting the bombing which gave the VC time to rest, regroup, and rearm.When you have your enemy on their heels it's never a good idea to call a time and let them recover.

Don't recall that we ever gave the VC a break from bombing. Bombing breaks, when they occurred, were given to N.Vietnam. That being said, it wasn't bombing halts that led to our failure in VN. That was because it was a civil war and they weren't going anywhere. The only possible way we could have won was by invading the north, but the proximity to China and the memory of what happened in Korea prevented that. Our experience in VN is also why I was opposed to the invasion of Iraq. We were already involved in a civil war in Afghanistan, so when Bush took his eye off the ball I knew that was a likely loser too and here we are 11 years later staring the same situation in the face.

 

[Manonthestreet]

SteadyMercury
VIP Member
Joined:
Jan 1, 2013
Messages:
3,468
Likes Received:
952
Trophy Points:
88
Ratings:
+995 / 10 / -0

usmcstinger said: ↑
Surgical Air Strikes will not do the job. B52 carpet bombing of ISIS logistics, HQ, etc in Syria will start to take them down. Those who survive the strikes will learn to fear the power of the USA.
This isn't 50 years ago, carpet bombing against a dispersed target like ISIS would be silly. An F-15E with four 2000lb JDAMs will do more damage to ISIS logistics, HQ, etc. than a B-52 carpet bombing with 80 500lb dumb bombs.



I agree with first part the latter may as well park a Buff and rain down smart munitions all day instead of 4

 

[SteadyMercury]

Yep that would do it even better, a B-1 or B-52 with a sniper pod and a pile of JDAMs would be a modern version of high volume bombing.