Quote Originally Posted by Cliff View Post
I would say that Desert Storm and OAF pretty convincingly argue that superior aircraft make a difference.
The Buff and the Bone did good work.
Is anyone asking the Army to go up outnumbered against T-90s in rusted out M-60A3s?
No. Though they did ask the Army for many years to go up against hordes of T-72s with a few old M-60s and M-48s. Bad allegory, I think. Regardless is anyone asking the USAF to go up against anyone with anything? Only the Indians have enough new aircraft on order to be remotely problematic. The Chinese are getting there but they have other problems. I doubt either of them will appear as an adversary in the near future, they have other things to do. The only serious challenger could be the EU and that is not terribly likely at this time.

Back to the farce of the QDR and NMS; This was your question:
While small wars and interventions need to be a part of our strategy, how they fit in with the other end of the spectrum seems to be the challenge to me. I'm curious to hear your opinions on the strategy change...
I initially responded with "I see no real change. Post 1992, the force for one real war, much less two was not resourced." I used the post '92 period to resonate with the current era but FWIW, we have never since 1944 (or other than during WW II, before, for that matter) resourced our nominal strategy of the time. There is nothing new except that the unclassified variant will be modified to reflect reality to an extent. Welcome to life in an essentially un-militaristic democracy. Note that our nominal allies all have the same problem except most of them have it far worse than us.

Not only the current QDR but the F-22 topic (as well as FCS, the Zumwalt class and other things) also are indicative of a shift from a realistically unsupportable strategy of buying not Silver but Platinum Bullets and having a quasi-conscription based large armed force in being to a more realistic smaller and hopefully far more professional force that has limitations, recognizes them and does not gloss over them by promising more than it can deliver. I anticipate significant pressure to avoid Platinum Bullet purchases, downgrading to mere Silver, in the near future (see the F-35). Be happy it will not go back to the 1950s with Lead Bullets in inadequate quantities.

The combat experienced force of the next few years will still be capable of doing things no one else on the globe can do or will be able to do for certainly the next 10 to 15 and probably the next 20 to 30 years. Thus, worry about hardware for the period 15-20 years out is IMO appropriate; for today, it's not an issue...

Thus I'm not sure there is a problem. If there is, I'm having difficulty seeing it.