When you refuse to significantly address something that makes 55% of our spending and is a number that grows a percentage almost every year while making a huge deal about something that makes up 1/3rd of that number it shows you don't have any honest desire to fix the financial issue but rather to use and amnipulate the financial problems of this country as a means to push your political agenda of anti-military policy in the guise of fiscal responsability. You are no different than the Republicans who want to cut a sliver of defense spending but look towards entitlements and again simply use our fiscal problems as a tool and a prop to disguise their purely political agenda.
"I am appalled that somebody who is the nominee...would take that kind of position"
"A court took away a presidency"
"...the brother of a man running for president was the governor of the state..."
It's horrifying because Trump is blunt instead of making overt implications.
Tankers don't work that way. It wouldn't be crazy, it would be friggin stupid, esepcially since tankers don't have any defensive armaments. So, no, not any aircraft can be a ground support aircraft, of the same caliber of an A-10.Basically any aircraft can be ground support even a tanker if you're crazy enough to fly low enough to drop fuel and then light it.
That's why they are more heavily armored than fighters, with the ability to operate at lower altitudes. The slower speed of the A-10 gives it an advantage, in that most anti-aircraft weapons in the world are zeroed for aircraft that are flying 3 times faster, which causes a high probabilty of over-shooting the target. The A-10's ability to operate on the deck, at a slow airspeed is what makes it a sutable aircraft for close ground support. F-15's, 18's, etc. fly too high and too fast to properly identify enemy targets on the ground, therefore increaseing the chances of fratricide. Hence the, "close, ground", part of the A-10's primary employment mission.A-10s inhabit an area of air space that puts them in real danger of many anti-air weapons that other aircraft can avoid and still do their primary job. Care to try again?
10 years ago, maybe. That's a big maybe, since the Israelis have never deployed forces outside the ME.The Israelis would disagree with you, as would actual experts.
All the technology on earth isn't going to take away from the fact that you can win a war from the air. The only way to win it, is to put infantry soldiers on the ground.Considering the technology we use, that's not a good comparison. Large combat operations involving tens of thousands have gone the way of the dinosaurs. A squad of fighter-bombers can decimate large advancing ground forces. You really don't need lots of soldiers these days unless you're planning an occupation, in which you need your head checked.
Link short-term war spending with short-term tax increases to pay for them.
We'll see how many republicans pursue sensless wars.
One Tin Soldier Walked Away..................