Has US Air Force attacks in Iraq and Afghanistan proved to be successful? Recently I was reading about Air Force attacks in Iraq and Afghanistan and I heard one critic say that the US relies too much on air attacks in conflicts like Iraq. They said that these air attacks inevitably kill civilians, which is just unacceptable. This ties in with a previous discussion that we have had about civilian casualties. If you will recall, I asked, “just how many civilian casualties are acceptable?” That question of course is one that must be weighed on a case-by-case basis. However many critics of the air force tend to argue that the only way to reach progress in Iraq and Afghanistan is with ground troops. The use of ground troops minimizes civilian casualties while attaining a similar progress that the USAF would earn. However I would like to know what you make of this situation. Has the US relied to heavily on Air Force attacks during the war in Iraq and Afghanistan? Honestly I think that they have struck an effective balance between air and ground forces. You cannot deny that air raids are a necessary part of 21st century war. It is notable that air attacks have been far more prevalent in Afghanistan than the war in Iraq. The air raids in Afghanistan have been in an effort to kill terrorist cells hiding in the mountainous regions of Afghanistan. The problem is that when attacking these terrorist cells they usually use cluster bombs which are notorious for causing civilian casualties.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
