Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!apple!sun-barr!newstop!sun!amdcad!amdcad!military
From: phil@brahms.AMD.COM (Phil Ngai)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Gulf Lessons re length of preliminary bombardment
Message-ID: <1991May22.035151.28374@amd.com>
Date: 22 May 91 00:45:17 GMT
References: <1991May20.052128.21457@amd.com> <1991May21.024354.13558@amd.com>
Sender: military@amd.com
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Lines: 17
Approved: military@amd.com


From: phil@brahms.AMD.COM (Phil Ngai)


I don't know, seems to me the Iraqi anti-air systems were ineffective.
Substantially below what I could imagine for SAMs.  A cruise missile is
just a slow, small airplane, it should be possible to shoot them down.
B-52s of course are sitting ducks.  Stealth bombers are a little
harder, but then again, they have to know where their targets are. I'm
not sure they would do much good in a Vietnam type of scenario. A
desert war is probably the best conditions that are possible for air
power. I suspect that we will never again see air power play such a
decisive role in future conflicts.

--
For the Welfare system to flourish, its clients must not.
Conflict of interest?