Monday links

Not much chance to write today. So in the meantime check out

Comments

  1. I had been reading the articles on ‘refuting the progressive qdr’ and just wanted to briefly mention how strained they were. let me just discuss some of the authors anemic arguments. F-22: essentially he argues that the f-22 is just so cool and amazing. wowee. and the russians- they have the ju-37. oh ah. and the chinese might buy it! scary. and with this in mind, how can we not buy the ultra expensive f-22? Now as a wargamer and video gamer, I certainly do appreciate the idea of the super-unit… however, budgetary considerations dictate… anyway, I was looking at globalsecurity’s take on the ’37.. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/su-37.htm lets go right to the relevant portions: first flown in 1996.- so 10 year old. Russia’s Air Force has not ordered any Su-37s. Yup that is a threat. and of course there is the china threat: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/china/plaaf-equip.htm so china hasnt bought any either. now just looking at it- this is not a stealth design. anyway, call me unimpressed by the su-37 threat. thats not to say that it couldnt be an impressive performer, say- being more then a match for f-15’s and f-16’s. if they bought them. and had a well trained and led and equiped fighter cadre. Of course there is the OC’s take on the nuclear warhead numbers: ‘let the military decide’ which was also rather thin on argument. and of course there was something about anti-sat weapons. except of course we have the most military sats- like our military spending- more then the rest of the world combined- so really- we have the most to loose by bringing war to the hights of expense this battlefield represents.. All in all, we are just one enemy short of a real serious enemy (so they settled on china) which in turn is just one european military short of having a serious miliatary threat. conclusion: rebuttle is thin but with some good jingo.