thedrifter
07-17-09, 08:26 AM
F-22 -- An Essential National Security Asset
by Michael M. Dunn (more by this author)
Posted 07/17/2009 ET
Updated 07/17/2009 ET
When it comes to defense planning, this much is constant: It is not possible to predict the future. That’s why we should prepare for a wide range of threats. That, in fact, is the key lesson of Iraq and Afghanistan. The nation over the past few decades largely ignored investing in irregular warfare capabilities because leaders thought we would never engage in it after Vietnam. They were wrong and the country paid for this mistake with tremendous sacrifice.
Failure to acquire the full "moderate-risk" military requirement of 243 F-22s repeats this mistake, just at the other end of the spectrum.
Critics decry the F-22 as a "Cold War weapon," representing unnecessary overkill for today’s threats. What these detractors fail to realize is that the air dominance we currently enjoy over Iraq and Afghanistan will not always be as easily attained and maintained elsewhere. The rapid proliferation of advanced surface-to-air missiles and other anti-access technology is limiting when and where the vast majority of Air Force aircraft can operate. During last year’s conflict in Georgia, the F-22 was the only fighter aircraft in the Department of Defense inventory that could have penetrated the defended airspace and had a chance of surviving. Considering that air dominance is the precondition for any successful US combat operation, this is a serious problem.
History is filled with examples that clearly illustrate what happens when our forces are unable to secure and control the sky. During the Second World War, we lost 10,000 aircraft and 30,000 airmen over the skies of Europe, and many troops on the ground died under enemy air attack. Ever since then, the US has been able to control the skies, and no soldier has died from air attack since 1953. That doesn't mean there have not been serious losses. In Vietnam, we lost 2,448 aircraft to a third world military whose Air Force deployed fewer than 200 aircraft.
Many of these kinds of challenges can be traced back to leadership decisions where individuals decided that the United States was not going to fight certain type of wars. They were wrong and Americans paid the price with their lives.
We must not repeat this mistake, for as history proves, the only thing more costly than a first-rate Air Force is a second-rate Air Force.
Michael M. Dunn is a retired Lt General and Chief executive of the Air Force Association.
Ellie
by Michael M. Dunn (more by this author)
Posted 07/17/2009 ET
Updated 07/17/2009 ET
When it comes to defense planning, this much is constant: It is not possible to predict the future. That’s why we should prepare for a wide range of threats. That, in fact, is the key lesson of Iraq and Afghanistan. The nation over the past few decades largely ignored investing in irregular warfare capabilities because leaders thought we would never engage in it after Vietnam. They were wrong and the country paid for this mistake with tremendous sacrifice.
Failure to acquire the full "moderate-risk" military requirement of 243 F-22s repeats this mistake, just at the other end of the spectrum.
Critics decry the F-22 as a "Cold War weapon," representing unnecessary overkill for today’s threats. What these detractors fail to realize is that the air dominance we currently enjoy over Iraq and Afghanistan will not always be as easily attained and maintained elsewhere. The rapid proliferation of advanced surface-to-air missiles and other anti-access technology is limiting when and where the vast majority of Air Force aircraft can operate. During last year’s conflict in Georgia, the F-22 was the only fighter aircraft in the Department of Defense inventory that could have penetrated the defended airspace and had a chance of surviving. Considering that air dominance is the precondition for any successful US combat operation, this is a serious problem.
History is filled with examples that clearly illustrate what happens when our forces are unable to secure and control the sky. During the Second World War, we lost 10,000 aircraft and 30,000 airmen over the skies of Europe, and many troops on the ground died under enemy air attack. Ever since then, the US has been able to control the skies, and no soldier has died from air attack since 1953. That doesn't mean there have not been serious losses. In Vietnam, we lost 2,448 aircraft to a third world military whose Air Force deployed fewer than 200 aircraft.
Many of these kinds of challenges can be traced back to leadership decisions where individuals decided that the United States was not going to fight certain type of wars. They were wrong and Americans paid the price with their lives.
We must not repeat this mistake, for as history proves, the only thing more costly than a first-rate Air Force is a second-rate Air Force.
Michael M. Dunn is a retired Lt General and Chief executive of the Air Force Association.
Ellie