"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
ink.net...
Me thinks that you have been reading too many books by ex-blackbird
pilots.
Or maybe looking at too many of their web sites. Still, they seemed to
make
some sense.
I don't know. The Blackbird was incredibly expensive to operate, something
like $200k/hr 15 years ago. The recon systems are dated and there is no
need to go M3 if the enemy doesn't have any airplanes. It seems to me that
systems like Global Hawk or Preditor, with their ability to loiter over an
area of interest and even to carry weapons, are far superior to an airplane
that flys by a 2000mph and then has to have its film developed after
returning to one of a very few bases capable of supporting it. Then, the
next day (at the earliest) something can be done about what was seen.
Chemical weapons need to be used in large quantities to be effective in the
open. An effective chemical arsenal would involve thousands or tons of
material. We have had access to the country and the people for a year. A
few guys didn't carry off and bury a million pounds of chemical weapons
unobserved.
Lets face it, we were duped into believing Iraq had WMD by Saddam's bravado
and our own over-willingness to believe. The issue now is how are we going
to extract ourselves from Iraq without looking like we were beaten off (ala
Somalia) or leaving a goverment as brutal as Saddam's to maintain order.
Ultimately, Iraq like Yugoslavia is not a natural country and perhaps only
force can keep it together.
Mike
MU-2
|