Thread: Russian aircraft buzz USS Kitty Hawk

Originally Posted by -{SpoonmaN}-

But no amount of surprise can compensate for the fact that the Russians simply cannot defeat the USA in a conventional war. Indeed, the Federation would have nothing to gain from trying, and everything to lose.

I said tac nuke.

Who's talking conventional war?

One of the SINGLE GREATEST ASSETS one can possibly possess when planning an offensive is an ENEMY THAT DOESN'T BELIEVE YOU CAN DO IT.

Before OIF did you think the Iraqis had what it took to ambush and shoot to pieces an entire Apache Bn, completely stopping them from putting a single missile on target?

I bet not. It happened though.

The Japanese should've known better when they attacked us. Any objective look at the situation showed that they couldn't hope to win, even from day 1 of the war.

But they did it anyway.

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

Before OIF did you think the Iraqis had what it took to ambush and shoot to pieces an entire Apache Bn, completely stopping them from putting a single missile on target?

I bet not. It happened though.
[/B]

Actually I was expecting the prolonged urban warfare scenario in Baghdad and Basra, with lots of casualties, choppers getting shot down, tanks getting blown up in ambushes etc.
Really the US Military got lucky that the Iraqis didnt bother to put up a serious fight in the big cities.

Originally Posted by canoe

I think the point hes making is the carrier knew the migs where there and even if they had tracked the migs incoming straight at the carrier they likely still would have done nothing. Given present politics Russian migs are not considered a serious threat.

If the political climate was such that the migs were carrying tactical nukes and willing to use them this would not have happened.

Sorry, but I respectfully disagree. Anytime you have a pair of high performance military aircraft bearing down on you with unknown intentions and without prior notification, you want someone up there to do a meet and greet, preferably armed and loaded for bear.

Originally Posted by -{SpoonmaN}-

Yeah I'd like to think that the CIA would have a rough idea as to whether or not the Russian Miliatry were planning to committ hari-kari by nuking CBG.

Ummmm, you're kidding, right? I mean you're talking about the same CIA that said that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, that managed to e-mail a list of all its Iranian assets to an Iranian double-agent which promptly turned the list over to Iranian Internal Security, that CIA?

Originally Posted by -{SpoonmaN}-

Actually I was expecting the prolonged urban warfare scenario in Baghdad and Basra, with lots of casualties, choppers getting shot down, tanks getting blown up in ambushes etc.
Really the US Military got lucky that the Iraqis didnt bother to put up a serious fight in the big cities.

They put up a huge fight on the way to the cities, so there wasn't much left to kill once we got into the cities, but there WERE big firefights in Baghdad.(Thunder run I and II anyone?)

And no, in 1000 years i would not have expected the Iraqis to be able to 100% thwart a coordinated Bn level Apache Attack.

Originally Posted by tim52

Ummmm, you're kidding, right? I mean you're talking about the same CIA that said that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, that managed to e-mail a list of all its Iranian assets to an Iranian double-agent which promptly turned the list over to Iranian Internal Security, that CIA?

Exactly.

Originally Posted by tim52

Sorry, but I respectfully disagree. Anytime you have a pair of high performance military aircraft bearing down on you with unknown intentions and without prior notification, you want someone up there to do a meet and greet, preferably armed and loaded for bear.

Absolutely agreed.

Until you VID a closing target it could be almost anything.

Can't take chances like that with 10bn dollar assets and the lives of 6000 men.

Originally Posted by tim52

Ummmm, you're kidding, right? I mean you're talking about the same CIA that said that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, that managed to e-mail a list of all its Iranian assets to an Iranian double-agent which promptly turned the list over to Iranian Internal Security, that CIA?

Off topic, but there is still evidence and high level witnesses in the Iraqi Gov to WMDs in Iraq prior to the US invasion. Evacuated to Syria. Ask yourself, if you were Sadam, the US armed forces massing to invade, and you hided WMDs from UN inspectors, would you keep them around for the aftermath? I think not. I have a feeling the whole story there isn't told yet.

I also agree that they may have all gone to syria before the war.

This is why i feel that deadlines are stupid.

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

I also agree that they may have all gone to syria before the war.

This is why i feel that deadlines are stupid.

Because all that a deadline does is tell you exactly how long you have to hide your forbidden fruit.

Yep.

Ambuguity is MUCH preferred when planning a campaign. If the enemy knows it's coming at all it is a setback, but when they know exactly when you're coming.....that is problematic at every level.