Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Cold War-era 'Warthog' plane targeted for retirement amid budget cuts [View all]bluedeathray
(514 posts)25. I think you're mis-analyzing the post
And missed the intent of the poster. I believe I read a distinct anti-war sentiment in his/her words.
I could be wrong, and am open to discussion. But the poster wrote that the A-10 was unnecessary because the Taliban doesn't have tanks... rah rah.
Anti war sentiment is fine. I'm all for it. But being covered by an effective weapon platform gives Infantry Platoon leaders the "warm and fuzzies".
IMHO, the reasons WHY we're here is a separate discussion.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
60 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
As a tanker, I have a certain affection and respect for the "tanker's friend", the Warthog.
Aristus
Nov 2013
#6
The Taliban would occasionally capture tanks from the Soviets during their war then.
Aristus
Nov 2013
#12
Wow, I didn't realize being in favor of retiring the A10 was tantamount to supporting the Taliban
NuclearDem
Nov 2013
#28
That and you need to knock out about half the aircraft before it feels uncomfortable
Posteritatis
Nov 2013
#54