I thought this system was integrated into the F-35 so NATO members were supposed to get the F-35s.
Russia and Ukraine
- Thread starter Bumblebee
- Start date
All that is great as long as the opponent is a conventional force....it doesn't stand a chance against an opponent such as the Taliban who through their very primitive means were able too repel a very sophisticated force. We threw everything we had against them yet they prevailed and excelled.
Even if NATO went into a place like Afghanistan in full force using the principles posted in that video, the outcome would have not changed, the Taliban would have still made us look stupid.
The only thing that we might have done different is to have kept a large occupying force there.
From what I am seeing the F-35 platform is not living up to the hype. It has run way over cost and is not delivering as it was promised.
mark3evo
Registered
Top 10 Fighter Aircraft | Military-Today.com
Which is the best fighter aircraft in the world? Which is the greatest modern fighter and why? Our Top 10 analysis is based on the combined score of stealthiness, armament, speed, range, maneuverability and technology.
www.military-today.com
You and I could make a list as well...doesn't make it gospel....
I think that is comparing apples to oranges.
The Taliban could not be defeated because they blended with the local population, used innocent victims as shields and if you were an Afghan, your best friend next door may have been part of the Taliban. It was hard if not impossible to separate them, define who their members were and where they were. The enemy was right next to you, without you knowing who he is and when he is going to do what.
I know, I was there a few times...
We used very advanced technology to fight the Taliban and were not successful.....even when they were in their strongholds we were unable to defeat them. There were conventional battles waged against the Taliban, it wasn't all insurgent warfare.
The west has been engaged in opponents such as the Taliban more than a conventional force....the first invasion of Iraq was the last time the US engaged a conventional force and a very weak, unsophisticated one at that.
It would be a whole other thing to engage an equally advanced and equipped force who are equipped with EW capabilities.
Never say never.
The irrational thinking displayed by Putin can only make us guess how this will end in Ukraine and perhaps continue beyond.
wgntv.com
The irrational thinking displayed by Putin can only make us guess how this will end in Ukraine and perhaps continue beyond.
Putin puts Russia’s nuclear deterrent forces on alert
KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — President Vladimir Putin ordered Russian nuclear deterrent forces put on high alert Sunday amid tensions with the West over his invasion of Ukraine. Speaking at a meeting with …
wgntv.com
I grew up in a similar society, where life means nothing, killing was a sport from one tribe challenging the next and if I remember correctly there were about 17 different tribes, plus imported folks who were executed simply because they were considered as not belonging to the landscape.
You cannot fix values with military force, unfortunately. This is still happening today in many Middle Eastern countries as well as Africa.
Interesting link below, of what less developed countries think about the Ukraine situation. The world sure has it's challenges with values from one race to the next.
‘Double standards’: Western coverage of Ukraine war criticised
Social media users accuse media of hypocrisy in its coverage of Russia’s war on Ukraine compared with other conflicts.
Last edited:
At the end of the day, these folks are all Russians, Ukraine has just tasted freedom which Russians do not have.
www.independent.co.uk
Ukrainian man offers to tow enemy tank back to Russia after it runs out of fuel
UK intelligence suggests invading Russian forces may be suffering ‘acute logistical difficulties’
www.independent.co.uk
Editorial: The Best Fighter in the World | Air & Space Forces Magazine
The radar-evading F-35’s very presence changes the nature of battle. It’s a strategic investment and combat tool, not a tactical one.
www.airforcemag.com
mark3evo
Registered
Never say never.
The irrational thinking displayed by Putin can only make us guess how this will end in Ukraine and perhaps continue beyond.
Putin puts Russia’s nuclear deterrent forces on alert
KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — President Vladimir Putin ordered Russian nuclear deterrent forces put on high alert Sunday amid tensions with the West over his invasion of Ukraine. Speaking at a meeting with …
one would have thought there to be rational General's that do not want to happen
someone should bump him off
JeffSyh
Registered
That myth is getting debunked lots of 5th gen super fighters go through growing pains. I will bet the f-35 will be the best multi role fighter ever.
Just to be straight, we (and the Russians for that matter) didn't lose to Afghanistan, it just became unconstructive to fight there. You can't bomb targets that are worth less than the bombs you are using indefinitely. The Taliban, ISIS, etc. all have a weapon that can only be countered by becoming a bigger animal than they are. They (the rebels) disperse into the civilian population so they are invisible. At this point, the only way to win is to kill everyone, and neither we nor the USSR were willing to do that.
The world has never seen the incredible destruction any of the superpowers could rain on an opponent and indeed the world were they to fully engage in battle. you have to look at war as two different things. An all-out war that includes gas, cyber, nukes, and all the things we don't know exist. The second is conventional, and even superpowers are limited in how asymmetric a conflict can get. For example, if you want to control a building the weapons you can use are limited to those that don't destroy the building. So the Afghans won the conventional war but we were not beaten, we just decided it wasn't worth escalating the war.
The "Unified battlefield" is a powerful tool because it allows all stakeholders to understand the importance of their missions. Also, the information can be automatically translated to different languages. There is superior command and control, even with the ability to decentralize control and allow individual assets to make more tactical decisions or bring appropriate assets on a target.
The F-35 has cameras around the airframe that allow the pilots to see right through the plane - eliminating a fundamental problem of vision that has plagued pilots since the days of biplanes. Further, the use of VR overlays allows the pilot to have enhanced vision, like markers on targets indicating who they are and what they are up to. Possibly even real-time vectoring recommendations for engagements.
Yes, I always laugh at "cost overruns". Most are because the cost of the planes and their development was purposely underestimated for political reasons. The second is because when a weapons system shows huge promise politicians try to add their pet projects to the base system budget running up the cost. Look for example at the shuttle. It was basically ready to fly lifting tel/com satellites into orbit. The military stepped in and billions of dollars later we still don't know what it was doing up there!
Piloted warplanes are on the way out generally in all-out warfare, but they are essential in conventional battles. Already 6th gen planes are projected to have crazy performance and will outfly the F-35. The Raptor is a superior platform in most ways to the F-35 except one: cost. Also, the development of full-performance drones will have an impact. However, the F-35 can be deployed and maintained in the numbers needed to fill the considerable shoes of the king of do-it-all F-18. There is even a flying STOL F-35 to fill the close air support role for the marines. Imagine a STOL platform that can get to a target at near supersonic speed?! This could even threaten the attack chopper role.
On top of that, what really makes great planes is conflict. Putin has just handed Lockheed Martin a big Christmas bonus as the NATO spec planes will be flying off the shelves (pun intended).
We didn't lose nor did we win....militarily speaking...
We did lose in Afghanistan-let that be certain....our very presence there changed their way of life and we stayed so long we changed a generational way of life, we left, the Taliban came to power and instantly changed life to what they saw......what we lost was our influence on the Afghan people and an ally.
We went there for our protection against terrorism from people like the Taliban. We did that and while it is an issue it is certainly not the problem it was. This is what people don't get - it was never our mission to build a new Afghanistan. Things just got out of control politically because none of the presidents were willing to leave and Afghanistan took the position let's just let the US be our army/police force so we don't have to do it. Leaving there was always going to be a mess, especially after Trump negotiated essentially an unconditional surrender. Biden just said I'll take the hit for this (which he has said publically he will not pass this buck). I believe this is in no small part because his son fought there. It is a shame that we could not set up a sustainable civilized society in Afghanistan, but we never could do that because the Afghans are the only ones who can.
JeffSyh
Registered
@fallenarch the f-35 and the f-22are 2 different platforms for different jobs. The f-22 is a air superiority fighter jet. The f-35 can go bomb a target with it great air to ground technology and shoot down a bunch of su-27 or migs on the way to the ground target or the way back and also help with radar and tracking to other planes and war zone assists. It can also provide electronic warfare. The f-22 is do one job and one job amazing the f-35 is so everything for a countries that can’t afford 15 different types of fighters, bombers etc.
We did not lose the war, if one can call it that.
We were mistaken and lost the novel idea of implementing Western values and a Democratic Government in a culture which understands only autocracy, and lives by totally different values compared to ours.
In short, we attempted to install a Western style government in the Middle East which will never succeed, no matter how strong our military and how long we stay.
Zerks
Registered
China has learned that Sleepy Joe isn't all that concerned with Putin. Many others are jumping in to help Ukraine now... so... Sleepy Joe can sort of play along and take credit for something later when it becomes obvious, or, deny it if it doesn't go as planned.
Taiwan will be easy picking with compromised Joe not doing anything worthwhile to stop it... oh, he will say something... a sound bite or 2... after that... not much will come of it. What other chunk of real estate does China want?
Similar threads
