From: Adam <""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"{at}the field.near
the bridge">

Phil Payne wrote:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/5371392.stm
>
> Harriers are so bad, we're sending another one.
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5357260.stm
>
> And the fact that the RAF is firing phosphorus rockets is a cause for
> concern.
>
"Other Parachute Regiment officers had told him they prefer to call in
American A-10 Tankbusters for air support when under fire because of what
they see as the RAF's ineffectiveness, he added."

Gives the lie away wrt the general Airforce preference for "shiny
& fast". Remember that the A-10 was scheduled to be replaced by
the F16 which would have been even more "useless" than the
harrier.

Pilots like to be safe & speed is life but one the ground....speed
means everything is either a blur or seen from quite a distance up.

Slow, maneuverable, heavily armed & armoured those were the lessons of
previous coin conflicts. Seems nothing has changed.

What was interesting from some of the coverage was that the pgm'es were
landing so close that one might assume it was the taliban launching weapons
at the paras & not air support for the paras.

Ritahar Khandahar. More boots are needed pronto. They actually can not get
land convoys to sangin & that's with apache, harrier, A10 etc riding
shotgun.

We have no reserves due to the Brown Blair combo of expansionist foreign
policy & ......Chancellor Brown.....

Hold the line but don't expect help is a fun message.

Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5