Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Let's distinguish between tactical and strategic bombing. The former has been very, very useful, in WWII and in Iraq. The latter, not so much. Unfortunately, the Air Force does not like bombing tanks in support of the Army -- it would much rather win the war on its own -- and so it seeks to defund planes like the A-10 in favor of bigger, faster, long-range equipment.
The bombing probably has made the insurgency worse, for the reason that civilians who get bombed tend to hold it against the bombers.
|
Bombing a weapons factory, a power plant, or the house where you think the opposing leader is staying -- is that strategic or tactical? I would define that as strategic, and effective.
As for WWII, I can certainly think of two strategic bombing attacks that were extremely effective, and many, many tactical bombing attacks that were not.
But rather than elaborate, let me propose a new Board Motto: Where bombs are the new tanks.
