Possibly the best summary of, and argument for, the use of modern combined arms as the pointy end of the campaign against some elements in highly selective circumstance against terrorist organisations ever on some occasions.

A sensible person would agree with that.

Sensible people are aware that while intelligence agencies and police work are always at the forefront of turning up information on the whereabouts of international terrorists. Senisble people are aware that in many settings, urban buildings and the like, you just can get around the fact that kicking in doors is the best way of apprehending criminals and terrorists.

Sensible people sometimes also remember that al Qaeda has history in occupying cave systems in mountain ranges, in occupying remote buildings, and in operating militia forces. Sensible people believe that soliders and bombs are more appropriate to dealing with militia forces than the police, and that sometimes dropping a bomb into a cave mouth is a better approach than asking for a platoon of soldiers to assault a kill zone.

Always use the appropriate tool for the job - police in London, soldiers in the Hindu Kush.

Possibly the best summary of, and argument for, the use of modern combined arms as the pointy end of the campaign against terrorist organisations ever.

This is a particularly pure example of the irrationality of RWDB framing of the nature of terrorism.

They see al Qaeda as equivalent to Austin Powers’ Dr Evil organisation: featuring underground HQ staffed by henchmen in Star Trek-type double-knit uniforms.

They believe that if you knock out Dr Evil, then the whole dastardly plot for world domination will go up in one vast explosion. Cue the go-go girls and roll the credits.

But sensible people understand that al Qaeda is nothing like this. Jihadists are winning hearts and minds one website at a time. Unless RWDBs come up with a laser-guided missile that blows up a computer every time one visits jihad.com, weapons of this nature simply serve to nurture the growth of al Qaeda.

In the meantime, RWDBs salivate at the prospect of using a billion-dollar delivery system to send a million-dollar missile to obliterate another hole in an Afghan hillside.

Pathetic and stupid.

if I was the Digger expected to enter a cave to clear it of terrorists, I’d much rather a GPS or Laser Guided 250 pound bomb acted as the door bell.

Possibly the best summary of, and argument for, the use of modern combined arms as the pointy end of the campaign against terrorist organisations ever.

THE United States has responded favourably to Japanese requests to buy the potent F-22 Raptor fighter jet, undermining claims by the Minister for Defence, Brendan Nelson, that the aircraft was not available for foreign sale.

In February Dr Nelson killed off growing agitation for Australia to seriously consider the F-22, citing a letter from the US Deputy Defence Secretary, Gordon England, stating the F-22 was not for sale.

Soon afterwards, he pushed through the controversial decision to buy 24 Super Hornet jets at a cost of $6 billion.

In recent weeks, Japan and Israel have approached the US to buy the F-22, a long-range fighter that can cruise at supersonic speed, reach extraordinarily high altitudes and has unparalleled stealth and a perfect record in exercises.

Before a visit to Washington this week by the Japanese Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, a senior US official said the White House was “positively disposed” towards selling the F-22 to Tokyo.

And:

Dr Nelson, who was travelling back from Gallipoli, could not be reached for comment but has said recently that he believes the F-22 is not the right plane for Australia.

How slow is this bloke?

Evan - you are right - jets won’t necessarily stop attacks, but if I was the Digger expected to enter a cave to clear it of terrorists, I’d much rather a GPS or Laser Guided 250 pound bomb acted as the door bell. And the current operations against terrorists aren’t going to be the only war we ever fight.

I don’t want to rain on anyone’s parade here, but can someone tell me how some new aeroplane is going to help us beat al-Qaeda?

It won’t. Nor will it solve global warming, cure AIDS or bird flu, or improve the political health of our pacific neighbours.

What they can potentially do is a) ensure that nobody enters Australian waters without our say-so, and b) ensure that Australian troops fighting in the region (god forbid) do so with the aid of bombs and missiles dropping on their opposition, not themselves, and thus c) make a) and b) less necessary.

How expansive you make those roles, how high a probability you assign to either of the scenarios that the air force becomes necessary, and how much you’re prepared to spend to achieve them, are perfectly reasonable questions to debate.

But Al-Queda is not the only, or even the most likely, reason for Australians to be fighting without the benefit of American air support. Conflict to our immediate north is.

I mean, they don’t even have an airforce, right? Their preferred methods of attack are hijacked civilian aircraft, IED’s and suicide bombers. Real down and dirty stuff.

Some new killer jet with all the bells and whistles imaginable on it won’t stop those sorts of attacks.

What will win it for us, if indeed the conflict is “winnable” in military terms, is a political solution to Palestine, a complete re-jigging of our approach to dealing with the Mid-East (to starve al-Qaeda of its political air) and some top-notch intelligence and detective work (to find and catch Osama and his homicidal pals).

So, no disrespect to all the Curtis Le Mays on this thread, but air power didn’t win us the Vietnam War and it sure as hell won’t win us this one either.

Michael Jackson is in discussions about creating a 50-foot robotic replica of himself to roam the Las Vegas desert, according to reports.
…
It has now been claimed that his plans include an elaborate show in Vegas, which would feature the giant Jacko striding around the desert, firing laser beams.

I would have assumed he meant China.

I didn’t, JPZ, but now you mention it, I probably do. God bless Norinco and all of is subsidiary companies.
Swio, if you haven’t seen it, this is for you. For what it’s worth, I think the technology ludicrously solves the wrong problems—and the microwave beam that heats up water molecules under people’s skin is more than a bit damn creepy. Maybe it’s non-lethal, but it’s still stomach-turning.

that they are second rate force with first rate equipment against a third rate enemy.

I am well aware of that. I know that most analysts think they would not last five minutes on a European battle field. Still, first rate second rate should be able to beat third rate. Why doesn’t it work out that way?

Even the yanks have stopped their quite outrageous lies about this now that they’ve decided not to start a gratuitous war with Iran.

Leinad: “Iran’s training Sunnis and Baathists…?”

I would have assumed he meant China.

In that regard, could some crikey subscriber please post the gist of their “Nelson, Peacock and the Boeing connection” story?

Cheers

The Israeli AF were spectacularly successful at destroying Hezbollah’s Iranian-supplied longer-range missiles, its larger headquarters, its limited mechanised forces and all of its means of transportation, from bicycles on up

That’s sort of the point. They did all that and they still didn’t win. Air power did everything it could be expected to and it wasn’t enough. Despite destroying headquarter’s and no doubt just about every last bit of military/communitactions infrastructure they could find in six years of intelligence work they never broke Hezbollah’s command and control and never stopped Hezbollah’s ability to attack Israel. Mechanised forces proved of little value to Israel so I doubt that it actually cost Hezbollah that much to lose them.

US/Israeli military doctrine is based around destroying an opponents ability to operate by taking out key points in their network. Their headquarters, key infrastructure such as fuel depots, transport and communication hubs. That’s why they have relatively small amounts of spectacularly expensive equipment. They do very heavy and precise damage to a relatively small number of key targets. This was the perfect doctrine against the heavily centralised Soviet Union or militaries based on the Soviet Union like Iraq. Take out a headquarters and you have effectively taken out a division. Our opponents have learned from that and today they’re completely decentralised. The smart ones have designed their systems without highly vulnerable nodes. That’s why Hezbollah retained command and control despite the air pounding.

Australia does not face a local opponent that meets the description of smart so its not really a problem for us at the moment, but there’s a good chance that before the end of the life cycle of the F-35’s we’re buying is over that situation will have changed.

My guess is that next time around things will favour those taking Hezbollah’s approach even more. The problem western forces face is that the cost of innovation is so high. Its relatively easy and low cost for Hezbollah to find better ways to hide its missiles. The very expensive technology we rely on now has made innovation for western forces a very slow, bureacratic and expensive business. It can take over a decade and bilions at least for a new weapon system to reach production. Witness the rate of innovation of Iraqi insurgents against that of the American forces there.

I think you should go back and read Razor’s comment.

Razor,
You reckon that given a week to prepare, manpads, a dozen men, earth moving equipment and camoflague you could make yourself invisible from the 1500m up the Super Hornet would not dare fly below ? I don’t believe for a second that task would be beyond an Australian soldier.

Against a dug in target an F/A-18 or F-35 is pretty much useless.

I think you should go back and read Razor’s comment.
Robert: the American T-37 trainer is supposed to give the IL-95 a run for its money in loudness, but then it’s a 1950s jet.
Christine: awesome. Just awesome.