F-22 Used For The First Time in Combat.

Foxnews.com ^ | Sept 22, 2014

[Jet Jaguar]

Fox news reported on TV that the F-22 was finally used in combat for the Syria/Iraq/ISIS airstrikes tonight.

[Jet Jaguar]

Well put.

[laplata]

Yep, I know about the A-10. :)

I don’t know what we’ll be using but Obama needs to stay out of all Rules of Engagement. I hope he plays a lot of golf.

[Nowhere Man]

That is cool. Should have used them with an atomic bomb. just to make a statement.

I'm for nuking the crap out of them, I don't care if we use an F-22, A-4, F-4 or my fave, the A-7, I'd get 'er done.

[MacNaughton]

29 ... I think that was the first combat for the F117A but maybe it was used in Operation Just Cause (Panama) 1989. I think by that time the F117A was in the white world.

Op Just Cause, DEC 1989 - CORRECT

2nd time was Op Desert Storm, JAN 1991

[doorgunner69]

Obunghole and congress have done all they can to kill off the A-10. What the ground troops need does not matter to them in the slightest (to most at any rate).

But from what I know of air support from the ground and helo level, the A-10 is perfect in that turd world environment. Not too survivable if enemy air is around, but it is not, so let the Warthog rip the muzzies up!

[familyop]

" Someone correct me if I am wrong, but IIRC, the F-22 is the first F/A to be outfitted with Atomic warhead capabilities..."

"Before that it was up to the B1 Lancer and B2 Spirit (again, IIRC). "

Just about all of them will carry nukes of various kinds. Here's one that all but the F-22 can carry.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B61_nuclear_bomb

[M1911A1]

Ha! What makes it better is that he knows I’m an OIF vet, so he assumes that I supported everything about the way Bush the Younger handled Iraq and Afghanistan.

IMHO, we should have kicked butt and left, pronto. Nation building in Islamic countries is a for the birds, and we were fools to try. Just show them that any trouble they cause will be repaid swiftly and in kind, but a hundredfold.

F22s and PGM are fine, but in a way it’s all self defeating. It’s a show of how limited and measured our response always is, even if it’s tactically brilliant.

It doesn’t accomplish the strategic goal of convincing the population that tolerates these nutjobs that they should quit supporting them, either directly or through inaction.

I think that if we unloaded a few thousand tons of dumb bombs on a couple of major cities, ala Hamburg or Tokyo, it would do more to deter the Jihad impulse than a whole decade of precision strikes.

Sherman was right. War is Hell, and you cannot refine it, even with laser guided munitions.

[Liberty Valance]

[freedumb2003]

>>Just about all of them will carry nukes of various kinds. Here’s one that all but the F-22 can carry.<<

Nukes got smaller I guess, but I just expect the deploying aircraft can get the heck outta there before the BOOM...

[Nowhere Man]

A principle I was taught was that you always use the best you have available - you certainly don’t not use your most modern weapons just because you are afraid of losing them.

First of all, if you’ve got that attitude, you may as well not have the weapons. But secondly if you’re worried about losing your newest technology, you should be even more worried about the survivability of the older technology - and remember that technology has living, breathing people inside it. You owe it to them to send them into battle with the best you have whenever you can.

(Old doesn’t always mean bad, and new doesn’t always mean better - sometimes older tech can have particular advantages in particular situations - but you don’t go old out of fear).

True. There is no such thing as an obsolete weapon, only the thinking might be obsolete. First thing you need is the attitude, the willingness, to fight as you pointed out. No matter what, if you do not have that, no matter if you have an F-100 Super Sabre or an F-22 Raptor, it ain't gonna help. The Russians for years have stockpiled their old weapons, they still have many weapons like the MiG-15/17/21's in storage along with oodles of tanks going as far back as the T-34. The idea there is when the newer stuff is all shot up, there is always the older equipment left in which they can still throw their weight around with. There are times even the older equipment can be superior to the new. For a while the M-60 tank with the upgrades they made at one time was superior to the M-1 tank. I'm also amazed that even though there are new rifles, there are still many old rifles like the 1891 Nagant, Lee-Enfield and Mausers still in frontline service today. It's interesting to see that those rifles are still being used for over 100 years, although if you go back further, the British used the Brown Bess musket from 1717 well into the 1840's.

[doorgunner69]

Not sure what you are asking, but fairly sure as far back as the F-84, ground attack (F/A) fighter aircraft have been nuke capable. Our Marine F-4B Phantom certainly was. There was a "Shape" kept under a tarp for training loading, but only gathered dust.

Google (gag) B-61 and aircraft certified to carry it. A lot of F/A types in there.

[krunkygirl]

Love it! Thanks for sharing-—put a big grin on my face!

[skinkinthegrass]

! 👍

[familyop]

Yeah, I know what you mean. But yes, they can be clear of the shock wave. BTW, F-16’s will carry B83s (1.2 megatons each). Besides having advanced stuff that we don’t even know about, our military forces are natural born pack rats and great at obsessive-compulsive maintenance. [Memories of doing preventative maintenance checks on and cleaning Army equipment here.]

[BBell]

Good. Get rid of the B-2 and use the money to buy more F-22s and cruise missiles.

[Vince Ferrer]

Not from Turkey. Maybe Saudi.

I don't believe we have a Saudi base anymore, it would be Qatar or Europe if it is land based.

[American Constitutionalist]

A MOAB conventional weapon would be just as effective against these Satan’s lapdog, that is ? If we had a lot of them in sufficient numbers.

[American Constitutionalist]

I have seen a few A10s fly overhead a few days ago so yes they are still flying.

[laplata]

It will probably leak out soon.

[American Constitutionalist]

I could be wrong but the engines mounted above the tail of a A10 helps in evading a ground launched missile.