gtafreak103 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Do airstrikes fix anything pretaning to criseses like in Syria or make them worse? I think yhey make them worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robinski Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Well if bombing a runway means an oppressive government can't bomb its own people, I'd say that's a damned good thing. For reference: Libya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmC12 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 They fix things by the enemy having no aircraft/vehicles/bases. Should they be used simply because they can? No. But if it's required then yes they fix things. It's alot easier to level a base with a guided missile than it is to breach the place and demolish it yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lil weasel Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Air Strikes are fun things. As the pilot you don't have to hear the Screaming and see the Gore. So you can go to the Officer's Club and have a few drinks before going to bed for a good sound sleep. And, then do it again the next day. If you kill or maim a few by accident, well... that's your superiors problem. You're just doing your job. As for how much good you've done... I doesn't matter, "I'm just doing my job." At no risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triple Penetration Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Air Strikes are fun things.As the pilot you don't have to hear the Screaming and see the Gore. So you can go to the Officer's Club and have a few drinks before going to bed for a good sound sleep. And, then do it again the next day. If you kill or maim a few by accident, well... that's your superiors problem. You're just doing your job. As for how much good you've done... I doesn't matter, "I'm just doing my job." At no risk. I want to be an airstrike. Sounds like a fun job! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typhus Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 (edited) Well if bombing a runway means an oppressive government can't bomb its own people, I'd say that's a damned good thing. For reference: Libya. Ah, but we need to be sure those we are helping are worthy of our help. Case in point: Libya. Many said it was a conflict between democracy and tyranny. Yet these 'liberators' turned upon Gaddafi like a wild beast, even defiling his remains. And from what I understand, they have now begun torturing those they believe to be loyalists of the old regime. They seem about as democratic as Robespierre. Whilst it is good to remove evil men, such as Gaddafi and Assad, can we truly deny that more often than not, our aid simply results in them being replaced by men just as bad? By that logic, I contest that airstrikes are not as important as having a controlling influence in their government once a conflict is resolved. Quietly guiding them towards a liberal secular state. Edited March 12, 2012 by Typhus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonshield Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Whilst it is good to remove evil men, such as Gaddafi and Assad, can we truly deny that more often than not, our aid simply results in them being replaced by men just as bad? Iraq comes to mind, doesn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sivispacem Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 They're more effective than diplomacy in many cases, let's put it that way. There are some circumstances where they're largely useless- Iran's nuclear program, for one- but as a way of damaging the ability of another nation to conduct military operations- whether that's against another state or against its own people- they're pretty hard to beat. AMD Ryzen 5900X (4.65GHz All-Core PBO2) | Gigabye X570S Pro | 32GB G-Skill Trident Z RGB 3600MHz CL16 EK-Quantum Reflection D5 | XSPC D5 PWM | TechN/Heatkiller Blocks | HardwareLabs GTS & GTX 360 Radiators Corsair AX750 | Lian Li PC-O11 Dynamic XL | EVGA GeForce RTX2080 XC @2055MHz | Sabrant Rocket Plus 1TB Sabrant Rocket 2TB | Samsung 970 Evo 1TB | 2x ASUS ROG Swift PG279Q | Q Acoustics 2010i | Sabaj A4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGTAGamer Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 I think they're pretty effective, especially if the air strike is destined for a target that will seriously hurt the enemy. Say, airstrips, industrial estates, military compounds, warehouses housing weapons or anything of beneficial use, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claude4Catalina Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 ^and the warehouse housing weapons makes pretty secondary explosions... ...wasnt there considerations of using an airstrike to level Bin Laden's compound, but it got ruled out due to the amount needed to take out the underground bunker complex and the case of identifying the body? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrDanceWithLance Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 It depends on how you use airstrikes. If you are using airstrikes to take out a huge pack of enemies, or a confirmed enemy stronghold packed full of them, then yes, it is effective. However, if it is just for taking out a city that is suspected to be a enemy stronghold, or just for taking out individual people or a small group of eneimes, then no, it is not effective. If used in that way, it will only make things worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sivispacem Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 However, if it is just...for taking out individual people or a small group of eneimes, then no, it is not effective. I'm sorry, but what the f*ck are you on about? Targeted airstrikes using specialist precision-guided munitions have been astoundingly successful in taking out high-value individuals and small groups in both conflict and non-conflict zones with relatively low collateral damage. They've done as much in the last four years to damage the operations of al-Qaeda in the Af-Pak region (and force their operations further afield into the Maghreb and Arabian Peninsula) as the entire ten-plus years worth of Afghan invasion has. Plus it was almost entirely small-scale, targeted, low-yield strikes against hardened military targets such as C3/C4i facilities and armour that led to the swift resolution of the Libyan Civil War. AMD Ryzen 5900X (4.65GHz All-Core PBO2) | Gigabye X570S Pro | 32GB G-Skill Trident Z RGB 3600MHz CL16 EK-Quantum Reflection D5 | XSPC D5 PWM | TechN/Heatkiller Blocks | HardwareLabs GTS & GTX 360 Radiators Corsair AX750 | Lian Li PC-O11 Dynamic XL | EVGA GeForce RTX2080 XC @2055MHz | Sabrant Rocket Plus 1TB Sabrant Rocket 2TB | Samsung 970 Evo 1TB | 2x ASUS ROG Swift PG279Q | Q Acoustics 2010i | Sabaj A4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Dildo Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 airstrikes are not meant for fixing stuff. they're meant for tearing stuff down or blowing it up. duh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dingdongs Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 However, if it is just...for taking out individual people or a small group of eneimes, then no, it is not effective. I'm sorry, but what the f*ck are you on about? Targeted airstrikes using specialist precision-guided munitions have been astoundingly successful in taking out high-value individuals and small groups in both conflict and non-conflict zones with relatively low collateral damage. They've done as much in the last four years to damage the operations of al-Qaeda in the Af-Pak region (and force their operations further afield into the Maghreb and Arabian Peninsula) as the entire ten-plus years worth of Afghan invasion has. Plus it was almost entirely small-scale, targeted, low-yield strikes against hardened military targets such as C3/C4i facilities and armour that led to the swift resolution of the Libyan Civil War. Don't forget the al-Awlaki air strike either. I believe UAV strikes are the great powers' tools for the wars of the future, that is when the war is a great power versus a third world nation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lil weasel Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 (edited) For what it is worth: Some data on Drone Air Attacks Some data on Cruise Missiles Attacks Nato air strike 'kills 14 civilians' in Afghanistan <Deleted Link Posted In ERROR> There was a time (briefly) when Air Attacks (Like submarine warfare) was considered Cowardly. Edited March 18, 2012 by lil weasel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sivispacem Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 NATO Air Strikes That link alleges that the US fired a cruise missile armed with a (small) nuclear warhead in Afghanistan. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make, but Uncyclopedia is a parody website. Quite apart from the factual inaccuracies in the report (like the fact the W80 isn't deployed as part of a Tomahawk arsenal (despite its original remit meaning it was designed to take the W80) as nuclear-tipped cruise missiles are of no strategic value compared to intermediate-ranged and battlefield-level ballistic missiles, which are far harder to intercept), it's from a website designed and written as a joke. Please clarify what purpose there was in adding that link to your comment? AMD Ryzen 5900X (4.65GHz All-Core PBO2) | Gigabye X570S Pro | 32GB G-Skill Trident Z RGB 3600MHz CL16 EK-Quantum Reflection D5 | XSPC D5 PWM | TechN/Heatkiller Blocks | HardwareLabs GTS & GTX 360 Radiators Corsair AX750 | Lian Li PC-O11 Dynamic XL | EVGA GeForce RTX2080 XC @2055MHz | Sabrant Rocket Plus 1TB Sabrant Rocket 2TB | Samsung 970 Evo 1TB | 2x ASUS ROG Swift PG279Q | Q Acoustics 2010i | Sabaj A4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionist Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 Panacea Targets; hitting the enemy's Centre Of Gravity (command & control) to disable his System Of Systems via Effects Based Operations. ...Or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triple Vacuum Seal Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Air Strikes are fun things.As the pilot you don't have to hear the Screaming and see the Gore. So you can go to the Officer's Club and have a few drinks before going to bed for a good sound sleep. And, then do it again the next day. If you kill or maim a few by accident, well... that's your superiors problem. You're just doing your job. As for how much good you've done... I doesn't matter, "I'm just doing my job." At no risk. Not sure if trolling or just stupid....*You sound like you have it out for the armed services' methods to the point where you choose what to believe based off what you want to believe. I don't know about "fun". You don't have to hear screaming and see gore to know that something is wrong (you can argue that it increases the empathy and maybe even sympathy for the victims) Military pilots don't kill innocent people by 'accident.' It's called collateral damage and is acknowledge by almost all armed services. Air strikes generally aren't a daily task for the same pilots in recent wars (for America at least.) "Do it again the next day" is a very naive video game/film influenced way to look at it. "At no risk"??? Your're kidding right. "shut up, sit down, relax" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now