In article ,
(Denyav) wrote:

We use few bombers and aircraft, but make them ultra high technology and
stealthy, so we don't need to fill the skies like in WWII. We use expensive
presicion bombs, so we only need

If I built a very expensive bike using most exotic materials available ,it
would be a ultra high tech bike ,but its still a bike.
Besides can you show me one theater in which USAF and its allies did not
enjoy a vast numerical superiority?

The reason we won in WWII was that we had *huge* advantages in materiel,
because we had massive productivity compared to the Germans and the
Japanese. The tanks we had, while not as good as what the Germans could
field on a one to one basis, were good enough to make that up by coming
in at ten to one, and had the support to keep them running. We had some
very nice heavy tanks that could manage toe-to-toe fights with the big
German heavies, but they were much more expensive to make and operate.

On the other hand, in some cases during WWII, the US and out allies had
very definite advantages in technology. The Norden bombsight (covered
in another thread), the B-29 (along with pretty much all of our heavy
bombers, which the Germans couldn't seem to match), code-breaking, and
*trucks*. Lots and lots of extremely reliable trucks, which could be
built in the tens of thousands without crippling the production of
fighting vehicles like tanks.

Wars are won with logistics, and even in WWII, we had that down better
than anyone.

Nowadays, while the US has gone into the high tech side of the equation,
we still keep the production side advantage. Sure, there are other
planes that are "pretty good," but nobody has the capability to make
them in the numbers it would take to beat the US.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.