link style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-style: none; border-right-style: none; border-bottom-style: none; border-left-style: none; border-width: initial; border-color: initial; " />
Some people are willing to forgive the defense establishment for its zeal in pursuing high-tech solutions. Gen. James Mattis, commander of Joint Forces Command, is most definitely not one.
In a wide ranging critique of defense planning over the past decade, Mattis blasted the ?wrongheaded thinking? of recent years that led military planners to seek technological solutions to solve war?s fundamental challenges and naively dismiss war?s unchanging reality. ?We embraced some wishful thinking, we espoused some untested concepts and we ignored history,? he said yesterday at CSIS in Washington.
Mattis didn?t mention the previous Pentagon leadership by name. But it was former SecDef Rumsfeld who turned ?transformation? into the catch-all buzzword signaling the military?s embrace of a Toefler-certified digital future. Phrases such as ?information dominance? and ?Effects Based Operations? filtered into doctrine manuals. In the new American way of war, near-perfect intelligence gathered from unblinking electronic eyes would replace the fog of war that causes confusion, casualties and uncertain outcomes with predictability in American military operations.
Mattis is determined to bury that notion. ?Defense planners will not be allowed to adopt a single preclusive view of war,? he said. ?War cannot
Herald,
The premise of your thread has been completely negated. You posted a flawed analysis in support of your case. The POTUS, OSD, USAF CoS, USAF Sec and most other Def Professionals that matter agree that 180 something will do, so go on ahead and get indignant and yet again fill another thread with a flurry of personal nonsense. All it shows is that
Appeal to authority is no answer. You don;'t have your own answer to negate so you fall back on it,. That proves that YOU have nothing. At least WP tries with rocket ranges and I show him that a DF-15 is not the preferred vehicle. The DF-21 is and it can cover Kadena as I described with the exact catastrophic results I showed. You really have no idea what a one tonne object arriving at 11,000 kilometers per hour can do?
a. you didn't do your homework
No you are just too ignorant to understand what I said. (I simplified an example for you so that you can visualize what the numbers show amateur.)..
b. you are incapable of being objective
You are too ignorant to objectively read data or undertstand what I say. That's a slam ON YOU by the way, because its obvious high school math and physics I use to deliberately keep it simple and clear so that everyone can follow..
you are incapable of admitting error
I make mistakes and admit them (I made one about a class called the Majestic on the Australia board a week ago and I said so) . You make mistakes and LIE when uou are caught (as you just did here, about me.).
d. you do not have the professionalism, composure or common sense to debate this as may others here do
StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy