gunnut

It's simple. We overwhelm our enemy with technology and numbers from all directions. We spent billions of dollars to make it look simple. The whole idea is "disproportionate" response. We want a completely lopsided fight in our favor. It's only hard because not many nations can afford this type of warfare.

Obviously. No one else can pull that off.

Russians didn't fire 1 or 2 missiles at the U2. They launched salvos. Those missiles didn't score direct hits. They may not even have physically damaged the U2. They couldn't reach the altitude the U2 was operating at. So they detonated under the plane and used the shock wave to knock it out of the sky.

U2 has a very narrow operating envelope at that altitude, something like flaming out at 420mph and breaking up at 435mph (memory is a bit fuzzy, and these numbers are what is disclosed by the CIA). The shockwave most likely stalled the engine and Gary Powers couldn't get it fired up in time and climb back to safety.

One more thing, MiGs used to make suicide attacks at U2s because they couldn't reach the altitude. They made shallow dives to gain speed and then climb as far as possible toward the U2. Then they fire their guns before stalling. Hopefully they could recover from the stall or restart their engine to rescue their planes before crashing. If they crashed, they may had to face disciplinary actions from their commanders, or even worse, the commies from the polibureau.

Yes. A very smart Serbian commander and a very poor planning on NATO's part resulted in the same F-117 passing through the same air space night after night at the same time from the same direction at the same speed getting shot down within spitting distance of the missile battery.

GIGO, garbage in garbage out. No amount of technology can rescue a poor plan.

Iraqis were well trained and well motivated. So are our guys. The technology made the difference. Or are you hinting Iraqis sucked at fighting?

__________________
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.