All excellent points Ken, and yes, the old "stupid things done badly" seems to be a constant challenge!
My point is that the article concerned does not merit being published as an OP-ED in the NY Times, purely because it lacks credible evidence and data. I want informed opinion, not mere opinion.
There is almost certainly a debate to be had about the effective implementation of ROE concerning CAS and Stand-off fires, but the article concerned does not form part of that argument, other than to show the current debate is being particularly intelligently conducted.
I just do not see any problem with using Air Power, IF it can be intelligently applied. If the evidence is that it cannot be intelligently applied, then stop using it - AND - point out the reason there is no CAS is because of the poor standards of training and leadership (risk averse?) does not makes its use supportable as a policy.
Bookmarks