Most important branch of the U.S. Armed Forces

[dead0man]

Strategic Command;

Thank you.  It is a Joint Command, often lead by an Admiral (and at least once a Marine General), but it's 75-80% Air Force employed and it's on an Air Force base.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A good argument could certainly be made there, but I'm gonna play homer and go with the AF because of the F22,B2,B1,various drones, ICBMs and general air superiority.

[dead0man]

Oh, and the Air Force does the space and cyber stuff too.

[dead0man]

Back in my active duty days I recall thumbing through the "parts" catalog for the USAF.  We had/have trains.  TRAINS!  Engines, various cars, etc (no track though).  I suppose it makes sense in a way, but in another way, it doesn't make any sense at all.

The USAF doesn't have attack helos because they are designed for taking out tanks and other ground targets and supporting troops on the ground.  Of course the obvious question then arises, why is the A-10 Warthog a USAF bird and not Army?  I don't know the answer to that.

And the Navy doesn't have a better air force than the Air Force.  And I'm not sure why this myth persists.  Landing on a carrier is impressive, but it's not like USAF pilots couldn't do it if they were trained to do it.  Average fighter pilot to average fighter pilot, it's probably pretty close between the two branches, but the USAF has MUCH better birds and a lot more of them.

And to reiterate, the USAF owns space and cyber warfare.  Two very important battlefields going forward.

[dead0man]

And throw in a "Police Corps" too, the Army isn't designed to play cop like we asked them to do in Iraq.

[dead0man]

While I agree with your reasons, I don't agree with your conclusion.  I think we should be (and we are) increasing the use of drones...and other robotic warfare.  Naval and ground warfare can certainly be enhanced by the use of robots.

[dead0man]

The USAF doesn't have attack helos because they are designed for taking out tanks and other ground targets and supporting troops on the ground.  Of course the obvious question then arises, why is the A-10 Warthog a USAF bird and not Army?  I don't know the answer to that.

Back during Vietnam, the Air Force got in a huff about the Army using armed observation aircraft in the air support role there instead of depending upon its jets, so ever since 1965 the Army is not allowed to fly armed fixed-wing aircraft.

Well the AF was wrong on this.  Especially back then when interservice battlefield communication was less than ideal.  It seems to me you'd want the boys on the ground to have clear and consistent communication between themselves and the air cover.  Friendly fire is a bitch.