at Agincourt count as "Having been subjected to enemy air attack."?



Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
Fair question. Do you know the answer?
Well, I'm pretty sure it's not Lichtenstein. I do not argue from the aspect that the F-22 is unnecessary, but the USAF has already been given the "hand in the face" by the SecDef on how many to buy. But still they whine about peer competitors. How about a nice "Aye aye, Sir" coupled with a snappy about face and press on. I would hope the 10 pound brains across the Potomac figured out how much risk to take by cutting production levels.

But I do keep asking them to allow me in on those NSC briefs... or just let me be in charge for awhile.

I agree, its ultimately predicated on whether you can accurately predict the level of the next few wars. Still, our military history shows more COIN/LIC level conflicts with the "big battalion" wars being the exception rather than the rule. So my Vegas bookie says bet on lower intensity for the short term but keep an eye on the trifecta of Beijing Moscow Tehran.

Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
Who's prepared to guarantee that others will play by our rules...
No one, besides, most of the "rules" imposed upon us are our own, stemming from a sincere desire to do what's right.

Perhaps we should stop assuming there are rules, but then we would be stooping to the base levels of those we fight.

It's a conundrum at best and all part and parcel of a Democracy with morals fighting a war using volunteers.