I obviously disagree with this on a fundamental level, but I don't really think it matters what evidence is cited - some folks will just feel the way they feel.
Using the logic above, you could also apply your comment on the "not doing your job all along" to the Army's COIN doctrine at the start of OIF phase IV, and the correction made more recently.
The AF has a stated requirement for more C-17s, just like it does for more F-22s. Unfortunately the civilian bosses get to decide what the services ask Congress for.
As for the USAF caring, I'm sorry you feel that way. I know the folks who I work with are well aware and all do care- almost every unit has someone deployed to the AOR. One of my two NCOs got mortared twice yesterday at Balad.
I'm not trying to say the AF and Army are committed at the same level - but as you just said, the AF is having to hedge against a lot of potential nastiness in the not so distant future. Would you rather the AF buy a COIN aircraft in great numbers and let China or Iran be able to use SA-20s to prevent us from deterring them, or do the COIN role with Predator, Reaper, A-10, F-16s, and B-1s? Until the budgets are increased it unfortunately is close to a zero sum game. Again, it's kind of like asking why the Army is asking for FCS and not a purpose built COIN system of systems. The entire military is forced to balance future high end threats against the current coin fight.
I'm not looking to start a big arguement here. Just pointing out that you can make similar arguements about any service.
V/R,
Cliff
Bookmarks