Originally Posted by
bifff15
And you didn't even answer the question either. Standard. Dude, the next AF Chief of Staff is going to be a heavy driver, guess lack of combat time didn't hurt him. My point is you put too much career emphasis on it.
As for the F/A-22 I would be willing to place a large bet that the Raptor will be put in front of the next shooting match to assure it gets some kills. I believe this aircraft is justified, others do not, and the PR campaign that follows will go some distance towards rectifying that. As for combat experience in that fleet it has quite a few guys with that square filled. At least one has a MIG kill. And they have been squaring away who gets in these days, too much dilution of core skills from what I hear.
Now we were having a nice little discussion and you have to start flinging sh!t with the pie hole comment. Why is it you have something to prove? Like most guys who meet you at the bar you would get a knowing smirk then get a good look at their back as they sought intelligent conversation elsewhere.
Oh, and if you do reply answer the question I posed to the Marine FAC.
Well, I thought my agreement to your original question was implied. I'm sorry you didn't read into it. Yes, one of the reasons why the Iraqi AF did not exist anymore was due to the success of the Eagle in Desert Storm. I agree the F-22 is needed. I'm sure that there are enough young Viper guys in the F-22 community to insure recent combat experience in that aircraft. I'm also sure there are enough old Eagle guys to insure combat experience at the leadership level. One of my points was that, yes, the lack of combat tours is going to hurt some guys and it sucks. They have my sympathy, not my scorn. You've already been corrected on your CSAF comments, so no need to address those. As far as the final comment, perhaps I should've put a little smiley face thingy at the end of the pie hole comment. Maybe that would've taken the sting off my little dart. I apologize.