The future air combat capabilities we should build are based on the F-22, a stealthy, fast, maneuverable fighter that is unmatched by any known or projected combat aircraft. But the F-22’s production run may soon come to an end at just 187 planes, well short of establishing the fleet size we need. After all, it’s expensive, and getting more so as the number contemplated has been repeatedly reduced. In an argument they seem to think makes sense, critics say the aircraft has no worthy opponent—as if we want to create forces that do have peer competitors.I don't have enough time to fully fisk Merrill McPeak's latest, so let me just stomp this low hanging fruit.
It’s been more than half a century since any American soldier or Marine has been killed, or even wounded, by hostile aircraft, a period roughly coincident with the existence of the Air Force as a separate service. Even during the Korean War—the Air Force’s first engagement wearing new, blue uniforms—enemy air attack was primitive and rare. The main air battle was fought along the Yalu River, just as in Vietnam it was fought over Hanoi, and in Desert Storm, over Baghdad. Our guys on the ground had hard work to do, but when they looked up, they saw only friendly skies.
For the life of me, I can’t understand why we should wish to change this.
1. You refused to engage in contributing ideas to win the war we are in, so you instead want to talk about the war you want.
2. You don't do well without a staff or fact checker. 50 years is 1959. What about the US service members killed by SRMB in Gulf War I? Air superiority isn't worth squat if death comes from a S/M/ICMB. Nice choice of services in your paragraph .... but how about the Sailors from USS Liberty in 1967? How about our proxies at the Bay of Pigs in 1961? Ok, that is a stretch.
Look at how many aces North Vietnam had.
That in itself tells you there is no other reason to read what Merrill is selling because, as we saw in the last two elections - he is a hack. A standard issue USAF-centric hack that is incapable of looking at anything objectively --- or even acknowledging all the pertinent facts.