Corsair: Whistling Death Video

[MiddleAgedKen]

Many, many years ago, I read Don Dwiggins's The S.O. Bees, a fictionalized account of the Jolly Rogers. It's been 40 years, but I recall it being not bad.

[Yogimus]

You only need a superfighter for the first 3 or 4 days of an engagement. Afterwards, hot air balloons are enough for what purpose the planes serve.


I have consistently been a proponent of a 2 seat double engine "Mini spooky" style bird. Small munitions, long loiter time. Cheap as shit airframe.

[Vonz90]

You only need a superfighter for the first 3 or 4 days of an engagement. Afterwards, hot air balloons are enough for what purpose the planes serve.


I have consistently been a proponent of a 2 seat double engine "Mini spooky" style bird. Small munitions, long loiter time. Cheap as shit airframe.

That assumes your enemy is a third world and/or regional power with an outclassed air force and crappy air to ground capability. That may be a good assumption for the common case, but the negative case will be very bad if your air assets are built around that model.

[Yogimus]

With the exception of 3 world powers, an airwar will last days not years. If we enter combat with those powers, in a serious manner, air combat will last minutes.

[Jericho941]

With the exception of 3 world powers, an airwar will last days not years. If we enter combat with those powers, in a serious manner, air combat will last minutes.

I don't follow your reasoning.

[Yogimus]

Nuclear exchange

[Kommander]

I would like to think that we could, for example, fight for Taiwan without things going nuclear but who knows.

[Aesop]

Why would we want to?
And if we did, why would China go along with that?
War is not a fair fight, unless you're doing it all wrong.
If you're not willing to club baby harp seals to win, you have no business fighting for anything.

The main mistake we made was not blowing a couple cities and bases in China into radioactive ashes in the winter of 1950 for entering North Korea.
It set a poor precedent, and hamstrung us ever since.
A fresh smoking hole every generation or so where someone's city used to be, and we'd have one helluva lot less problems conducting our affairs in the world.
And the other kids would find that everyone else would play nicer as a consequence. As a side bonus, the total casualties suffered would go down.

Imagine instead of Linebacker II in 1965 instead of 1972, we'd just decided that Hanoi and Haiphong were the problem.
The Vietnam war is over in an day, and 58,000 Americans and 2,000,000 Vietnamese aren't killed in another decade of war.

[Yogimus]

Why would we want to?
And if we did, why would China go along with that?
War is not a fair fight, unless you're doing it all wrong.
If you're not willing to club baby harp seals to win, you have no business fighting for anything.

The main mistake we made was not blowing a couple cities and bases in China into radioactive ashes in the winter of 1950 for entering North Korea.
It set a poor precedent, and hamstrung us ever since.

COUNTERPOINT!

We should have helped north korea unite with the south, and went from there. End result? One korea under american influence.

[Aesop]

We should have blown the entire Chinese Army into fallout first, then annexed and united both Koreas with their capitol in Seoul.
And told China to eff off in perpetuity.
Anybody up north who didn't like the new regime to be given a free boat ride to Vladivostok, Shanghai, or Havana, at their discretion.