gambit
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2009
- Messages
- 28,569
- Reaction score
- 148
- Country
- Location
In every war, there come a point where the irrelevancy of a technology and/or technical aspect of the war trespassed the point of no return.
For example, the VKS is effectively irrelevant. Am not saying the VKS cannot continue to drop bombs, but the issue is whether its continuation is enough to affect the outcome.
It seems, perhaps early, that the outcome of the war rests on the brutality of individual battles, whether it is soldiers against soldiers or tanks against tanks. I have no problems declaring airpower irrelevant if/when the progress demands it, and right now, airpower, specifically the fixed wing variety, is irrelevant. There is no longer the need for finesse of strategies or creative use of historical precedents. It is now which side can inflict the most pain in the most blunt methods. The irrelevancy of a technology and/or technical aspect of a war does not mean a guarantee of a loss to any side. It just mean the war has gradually moved to a less sophisticated phase.
For example, the VKS is effectively irrelevant. Am not saying the VKS cannot continue to drop bombs, but the issue is whether its continuation is enough to affect the outcome.
It seems, perhaps early, that the outcome of the war rests on the brutality of individual battles, whether it is soldiers against soldiers or tanks against tanks. I have no problems declaring airpower irrelevant if/when the progress demands it, and right now, airpower, specifically the fixed wing variety, is irrelevant. There is no longer the need for finesse of strategies or creative use of historical precedents. It is now which side can inflict the most pain in the most blunt methods. The irrelevancy of a technology and/or technical aspect of a war does not mean a guarantee of a loss to any side. It just mean the war has gradually moved to a less sophisticated phase.