[ QUOTE ]
the people doing the orders give the wrong ones.
[/ QUOTE ]
Be that as it may, the most powerful weapons pointed in the wrong direction still can't aquire the target.
American military might is awesome, no one would deny that, but it's main purpose is the comfort factor it provides people like you, and the intimidation it inflicts on the rest of us. The track record, as Verm mentioned in one of his posts, is mediocre at best.
This whole world runs on perception. Leadership is everything. Good leaders manage the perception of those that they lead. Read Rudolph Guiliani's new
book, it's the most recent reiteration of these concepts that I have read.
aswell being the operative word.
US troops represented only about 74% of the combined force (Gulf War)
So the word mostly is still correct.
From the horses mouth
[ QUOTE ]
im quite sure that, if it came to it, we could destroy them in battle with our airforce alone.
[/ QUOTE ]
History doesn't agree with you.
The airforce is usually one of the first arms of the military deployed, but 'almost' every conflict in our post-cold war era has seen foot soldiers deployed.
Certainly every conflect against organized troops as opposed to the rabble of disgruntled peasents strapped with AK's that the US has squashed in my lifetime.
The VC had the napalm fighter jets flying home in the 70's. Mission 'not' accomplished. You're presumptions don't stand the test of time dude.
I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers, I'm just trying to shine a light to show a different perception. An elephant can easily squash a sizable target like a watermelon, but 400 sleeper cell ants running around under him (capable of functioning in the absence of central leadership) and now the big guy's stregth becomes his weakness.
I'd argue the exact oppsite. Old school conventional warefare is so much more difficult to contain than big fat juicy targets. China understands this, so did the VC (and the commies that armed them).