F-22 use and mission creep...

First check this out from Breaking Defense...

“Effective planning requires the use of the right force at the right place at the right time,” Dave Deptula, the man who ran the air war in Afghanistan, says in an email. “The F-22 is the world’s most advanced combat aircraft and has the ability to negate the effectiveness of threat air defense systems. That’s why it was used in this case. There was no “dry spell,” rather the previous operations in the permissive airspace of Iraq and Afghanistan did not require their capabilities.”

Don't be fooled.

The F-22 wasn't needed to penetrate Syrian air space.  Not unless you believe the Israeli Air Force is MUCH better than our own.

Why do I say that?

Simple.  The Israeli's have been running missions into Syria for a while now.  Additionally they've struck targets with impunity.  The Syrians have never been able to lay a hand on them.

So lets put away the fiction that the F-22 was necessary for the success of these strikes.

UPDATE!!!!  Patrick reminded me of another fact.  Why weren't Syrian air defenses attacked if they were a threat to US war planes?  They weren't attacked and they didn't fire on our jets!  That tells me that there was either military to military contact that worked out the arrangement OR diplomatic back channel means were used.  What does that mean?  THAT MEANS THAT THE F-22 WAS SENT OUT ON A MISSION FOR PURE PUBLICITY AND NOTHING ELSE!

Now that we've put away that insanity have you noticed the mission creep?  Did you notice the emphasis on striking the Khorasan Group?

Never heard of those guys before a couple of days ago and suddenly they're the main effort?

Interesting.

Its also fucking mission creep, it also expands the war and its all bullshit.  Why are we hitting those guys?  Why are they a threat to the US?  Why are they suddenly a threat to the region and the world?

When you get the answer let me know.

Should the US institute a secret Hannibal Directive if a pilot is captured.

I ask this in all seriousness.  Should the US institute a secret Hannibal Directive if a pilot, special ops troop or other personnel is captured by terrorists?  A little background.  The IDF has the HD as a backup if efforts to rescue captured personnel prove futile.  What is it?  It means that they attempt to kill the captors AND the IDF member by use of air, artillery, or naval gunnery strikes.

Is it the right thing to do?

I just don't know.

What I do know is that ISIS has changed the game...well quite honestly they simply raised awareness.  Many people have been tortured and then mercilessly killed by terrorists.  They just never broadcast it live for the world to see.  Remember the attack in Mumbai?  Want to know why I was so outraged?  Because the terrorists attacked, brutally beat,  raped an elderly woman while her husband watched, castrated him and then shot them both in the face.

You know the issues with ISIS and their decapitating journalists.  So what should we do if one of our pilots is captured?  Could we consider a full on Tomahawk strike a gentle mercy?  I'm wondering.

About those airstrikes and a new terror group....

Yep (by popular demand) this shit will spiral out of control...

Question.  Where did this new even more dangerous terrorist group come from?  The name escapes me but its the rage of the blogging universe.  Suddenly ISIS is once again the "minor league" and there is an even bigger bad wandering the earth?

I would so love to know what the TRAP plan is for a downed pilot.  But I'll tell you this.  From my chair this whole op looks hasty, poorly planned, without a clear cut objective and is simply a case of "doing something" for public consumption rather than military necessity.

In other words, it looks like pure theater....bullshit from 30,000 feet.

Tomahawk cruise missiles and Fighters strike Syria!

Breaking news...more to come....

Navy narrows down the cause of the F-35 from 136 possibilities to 4.

via Courant.com

"We started with about 136 or so possibilities of what we thought this could be. And we are down to about four," he said.
The June fire at Eglin Air Force base in Florida resulted in a grounding of the F-35 fleet and kept the planes from flying at two major air shows this summer. It renewed concerns about the about Pentagon's nearly $400 billion weapons program. The engine is manufactured by East Hartford-headquartered Pratt & Whitney, a division of United Technologies Corp.
Military and company investigators determined the fire occurred as a result of fan blades rubbing against an adjacent seal. Weeks ago, officials at the F-35 program said a solution should be found by the end of September and be moderate in cost, a price that Pratt has agreed to cover.
Hempstall's comments Monday at a Connecticut defense and aerospace conference hinted that a solution could be found in October rather than by the end of this month as initially planned.
"Within the next couple of weeks, we believe we are going to come to a resolution and know what that is," he said. More than 100 of the planes have been built, the vast majority of them production aircraft that will be put into service, he said.

So they're walking back earlier, more optimistic estimates...I'm not surprised.

I wonder how this is going to affect the "C" model going out to the boat for testing?  I'm willing to bet that the testing will be delayed.

Read the whole story here. 

Ukraine lost 65% of its military hardware in the fighting around Donetsk

via RFE/RL.org

"The more Ukrainian army battalions or brigades are brought up, the more troops there are from the Russian Federation," Poroshenko said in a question-and-answer session with Ukrainian journalists.
He also said Ukraine had lost 65 percent of its military hardware on the front lines during fighting in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions.

Jesus!

The fighting was that intense around Donetsk?  Still I don't know.  Russian forces indicated that they were suffering heavy losses while Ukraine denied it.  Additional the Ukrainian President was just in the US asking for heavy weapons.

So once again we're caught in the murky world of propaganda.

What's true?  I just don't know. 

Amphibious Combat Vehicle 1.1 (ACV 1.1)

BAE just put out the above video and supposedly there is suppose to be an industry day later this week.  Additionally HQMC is putting out a bit more information on how the upgraded AAV and MPC will work together (like how they're going to have to increase the size of the AAV battalions).

It all points to politicking for Dunford to continue the MPC/ACV 1.1 project.  I'm not sure he'll be swayed.

It all depends on that 900 pound gorilla in the room, the F-35.  If it turns out to be as cheap as we're being told...AND...its maintenance costs aren't back breaking then maybe (but I seriously doubt it).  Additionally the CH-53K flies in December and is going to gobble up funds soon too.

My guess?  The AAV will continue for another 20 years.  Just a reminder of what we were told.  Check out the vid below...