Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : To be a Liberal,you have to believe that..... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Henry Volquardsen who wrote (4660)	10/27/1999 8:03:00 PM
From: Hoa Hao	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6418

Congrats to Ma!! She now joins the rest of us German Americans. Have a beer for me. "blanket the battlefield with fighter sweeps" Thats what I thought happened!! There really was not much German fighter strength Left in France by the time of the invasion. What the US/UK did in terms of tac air dawarfed anything the Germans ever did. Much of the problem of supply was the lack of ports available, the Germans of course hardly co-operating and blowing things up. That is what "A bridge Too Far" is all about. Trying to get in to the Dutch ports. What I think you can make an argument for is something kicking around my head for years. Instead of a massive four engine bomber program, develop a really large transport capable of moving a tank, or developing a air transportable tank. Imagine a air drop by glider and C-47 on an air field deep behind the lines. Then several hundred sorties a day by really Big 4 or 6 engine transports. The possibilities boggle the mind, but it is probably a bit too far for the thinking of the day.

To: Henry Volquardsen who wrote (4660)	10/27/1999 8:56:00 PM
From: MikeH	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6418

You've struck on the key strength of air power here. It is not in attacking targets, air power cannot be used to deny access to land, factories or oil, only infantry can do that. But, air powers key strength is in disrupting logistics. Not only can it be used to destroy the transportation network, but in conjunction with sufficient intelligence, it can be used to disrupt production - for the short term. By disrupting an enemies ability to move food and supplies, you demoralize the military (not the population), and you greatly reduce their fighting effectiveness. Making them easy pickings for well supplied troops coming in from the other way. Air power is most dominate at sea, because the key element, men, have no where to hide. Because America does not fight sea battles anymore, it makes our air force (and navel birds) very expensive methods of disrupting the enemies ability to move food and supplies. Effectively, we have a multi billion dollar partisan army on hand. If we took the time to use intelligence to cultivate rebel groups in enemy nations, we could do a much more effective and less expensive job of it. But then, partisan armies don't make for good coverage on CNN.