Thread 63995003

How can you win a war against an enemy that has air superiority?

>>63995003 (OP)
You generally don't

yeah

>>63995003 (OP)
you don't

>>63995004
The US has had air superiority since the 50’s and look where that got them

>>63995010
Yeah, butchering our enemies so thoroughly and consistently that the public start feeling bad about it and want us to stop.

>>63995003 (OP)
Gorilla tactics

>>63995024
Picrel. Fuck your air superiority

>>63995014
>>63995010
I guess your strategy can be to drag it out so long that your ass getting kicked gets sympathy from your enemy

>>63995003 (OP)
How can you win a war with only air superiority

>>63995027
What if i want to capture enemy territory though?

>>63995003 (OP)
You blow up their airbases with drones and have enough AA to stop their jets from going deep into your backline to destroy your factories.

>>63995004
>>63995009
Vietnam vs the US and Ukraine vs Russia and Taliban vs the coalition forces and Houtis vs the coalition forces.

>>63995041
Just walk over and take it lmao a plane is in the sky what's it gonna do? Fly aggressively at you?

>>63995027
You’re right losing the will to fight since you’re blowing tax payer money on over priced under produced munitions is just sympathy. The damage done by airstrike has been overrated since dive bombers in WW2

>>63995003 (OP)
Don't show up.

Why is she doing this to him. Anyone? His history doesnt add up to the countless complaints against him. I say sword. Last time I heard he was only one there for here. Why so terrible to your guy. He is not your father thats what you dont understand. Time to grow up be mature because all youre doing is show us the job isnt for you. Alot worse you have to deal with on daily basis. Oh you didnt think that part through. Stupid group troll bitches. It will back fire on all of you. Watch & learn. They have zero political associates.

>>63995099
Im not associated with the russians spammers,
You can see in multiple thread the frog shooting the russian spammer.
mine was a genuine question

>>63995003 (OP)
Yeah no idea, after all the US won in Korea and Vietnam

>>63995003 (OP)
Sit innacave for 20 years then get a free military base. Worked for taliban at least.

>>63995003 (OP)
If they have 1 plane and I have none it's doesn't really matter.
If they are trying an annex me they still can't without defeating my ground forces.
If I'm invading them I can capture airfields with my ground forces.

It's not a magic "I win" and the US is only able to benefit so much from it because they also have massive ground forces.

>>63995064
Americas failure to win modern wars was never a failure of the military
It was always a problem of entering wars without achievable objectives
"Spreading democracy" is not obtained through military force
we just go to the ME to destabilize any threats to Israel, which we succeed at, but that's not our stated purpose so when we leave it looks like giving up

>>63995003 (OP)
Wait and hope they aren't genocidal

>>63995044
Vietnam ended in a peace treaty, talisman vs coalition forces wasn't a "war" and strikes on the houthis has successfully limited their capabilities as can be seen by a steep decline in the frequency of attacks.

Wait for the inevitable total demoralization and eventual collapse of their society brought about by the decadence needed to maintain the sort of technologically-advanced empire that would require massive spending in military air power.

>>63995003 (OP)
Yakult Peach for me
less sweet

>>63995003 (OP)
Guided RC drones with explosives. Too small for the plane to shoot down but can chase one down up to about 800mph.

>>63995631
*RC jets

Look em up, learn to build em. Also look up how to build a model rocket RPG and guided model rockets or dumb rocket mortars. Might be useful.

>>63995003 (OP)
Well, it's not really up to you. But you can technically win if:
1. The enemy is afraid of escalation
2. The enemy has a political faction that's against the war
3. The enemy handicaps itself by abiding by modern, western rules of war
4. The enemy is grossly incompetent and corrupt
5. Your side is a third world shithole with a very high birthrate, and you end up being too expensive to kill, because your lives aren't worth anything, but modern weapons are
Usually it's a combination.

SEND IN ANOTHER WAVE

>>63995631
retarded dronebrain. come back when you're over 18

>>63995003 (OP)
Get air super-superiority, duh.

>>63995010
>The US has had air superiority since the 50’s and look where that got them
Waiting until we give up and leave after taking <10% casualties compared to that of our enemies?
Never ever losing a single pitched battle?
Richest country in the world?
World hegemon and sole remaining superpower?

You mean that place that it got us?

>>63995768
Didn't you guys lose WW2?

>>63995003 (OP)
>die a lot
>cry a lot
>wait for the enemy to get bored of massacring you (this may take up to 15 years)
>claim you won
>drop by McDonalds for a burger
Classic ultimate counter-American strategy. Japan, Germany, Korea, Vietnam, Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan, probably some others mixed in there. It works everytiem!

>>63995044
>Russia and Ukraine
>either side having Air Superiority
come on now

>>63995004
USSR won against Germany.
One of the prerequisites maybe during
1. Air power like during WWII is generally weak and doesn't have enough impact to strategically affect war.

>>63995044
Drones are air force themselves what is you suggesting is air superiority.
Literally check definitions.

>>63995044
vietnam had air superiority thoughbeit

>>63995870
No, they didn't. They got raped up the ass, and were only on the winning side due to their allies, who had logistical air superiority.

>>63995003 (OP)
You don't
What you can do is stall them until they get bored and go home, which may or may not count count as a victory depending on the circumstances

>>63995631
>>63995635
underage retards get off my board

Fight in the shade

>>63995003 (OP)
Air-superiority often represents a general strategic superiority. So you don't.

>>63995004
Nuke their capital or destroy their will to fight, or shoot them down.
Planes can't stop propaganda

>>63995014
That's a funny way of saying the army ran out of steam fighting unwinnable wars. Winners win first then go to war. Losers end the gold standard pang off war debt

>>63995768
>give up and leave
That doesn't sound like winning a war to me. Americans take few casualties because they hide behind their cannon fodder "friends", who end up taking plenty of damage on their behalf, is, Vietnam, Afghanistan

>>63995341
>Vietnam ended in a peace treaty
More like a retreat-y, amirite?

>strikes on the houthis has successfully limited their capabilities as can be seen by a steep decline in the frequency of attacks.
Because Drumpf made a deal with them not to bomb US ships.

>>63995808
>a clown could take countries but the US government couldn't
>this is a victory

>>63995003 (OP)
Spend blood until the other guy is tired of spending money.

>>63995003 (OP)
sit in caves/jungles until the enemy gives up

>>63997147
>Americans take few casualties because [hilariously derivative cope]

>>63997207
>no denial detected
Thanks for playing

>>63995003 (OP)
Bait them to fight in winter, during a thunderstorm, while staying in your metal underground base.

>>63995004
Are you sure about that?

>>63995874
Drones are part of the army.

>>63997147
>>strikes on the houthis has successfully limited their capabilities as can be seen by a steep decline in the frequency of attacks.
>Because Drumpf made a deal with them not to bomb US ships.

Yeah and I'm sure the bombings had no effect on this at all anon definitely

>>63995768
>>63995014
I think you're leaving out the bit where the US only fights impoverished third worlders who fight with sticks and a have a boomerang for AA

>>63999376
>impoverished third worlders who fight with sticks and a have a boomerang for AA
Cool hyperbole but that is far from the truth

>>63995003 (OP)
You pray to god you are fighting a retarded nation that barely understands why they're at war, has no desire to take your land, and is unwilling to kill civilians.

If they want to take your land and remove everyone on it, you will lose full stop. They will kill all of you and guerilla warfare will be pointless, since the general public you blend into will be a target rather than a shield.

>>63995149
The US did win in Korea. Although you have a point with Vietnam.

>>63995003 (OP)
Ground superiority. Make Vietnam look like a cathole.

Asymmetric Warfare and Intel.
>Send agents into the land of the goyim
>Infiltrate their economy and government
>Contractually obligate them into mass taxation for hilariously small returns on military hardware as you compromise the operational security of the small returns they do achieve
>Buy massive quantities of their bonds on the market so you can hamstring their monetary policy
>Trick their politicians and captains of industry into sleeping with underage prostitutes so you can blackmail them and set up a money laundering Super PAC to bribe the others or get them run out of elections while ensuring your compromised assets stay in place
>Use your compromised assets to enforce an “alliance” with you and use them as your personal expeditionary meat shield to eliminate your other enemies
It’s a good thing nobody has ever done that to America or we would be super duper fucked right bros?

>>63999034
Of course not, because they're still sinking ships in spite of it.

>>64001805
How antisemitic of you

>>63995064
Fun fact: we've built over half a million of these and they're so cheap that we could allocate a 2000lb bomb individually to each and every member of the Chinese People's Liberation Army (including the reservists) for less than 10% of our annual defense budget.

>>63995003 (OP)

Fight your enemy in a manner that negates that advantage. The Soviets famously made German airpower largely useless during the Battle of Stalingrad by "hugging" them (forcing their enemy to fight in such close quarters that air support and even tanks could not be employed without risking friendly fire).

There's also airspace denial with ground-based air defense, which Ukraine has used to great effect.

>>63995010
>>63995044

The USAF only had total air superiority over South Vietnam, flying over North Vietnam was still an incredibly dangerous proposition even during Operation Linebacker II which resulted in the loss of over two dozen aircraft despite achieving its nominal objectives.

>>63995870
>USSR won against Germany.

Only after the Western Allies ground the Luftwaffe into the the dirt for them.

>>63995310
> Americas failure to win modern wars was never a failure of the military
i can let this pass regarding afghanistan
but vietnam?

>>63995003 (OP)
Hope they get bored and go home.

The US has never attacked a near-peer, so has ever actually won a single air war.

The western concept of air superiority is synonymous with bombing enemies who have no air power at all, or having ten times as many planes as the middle power they attack. Attacking inferior opponents doesn't make American air power superior.

>if America has air superiority
If.

>>64004828
Ah yes, the famous battle after all the US troops left after the Paris Peace conference.
>>64006821
Not America's fault no other nation can become a pere.

>>64007650
> le Paris Peace conference
look at the map i posted
as the war progressed North Vietnam gained territory
while South Vietnam (and the US) never managed to push into Northern Vietnam and steadily lost territory

had the map looked like picrel the peace negotiations would have played out different


> become a pere.
well at least you are not a comping american

>>63995003 (OP)

Good question some possibly:

1) Russia has not just air superiority but effectively air supremacy in Ukraine outnumbering Ukrainian aircrafts 20 to 1.

However they struggle to use that to their advantage. Why?

Ukraine is filled with all sorts of anti air systems. Loads of them. So the attrition rate of using the Russian air force in it's full capacity would be unsustainable. The Russians just cannot replace planes fast enough to make up for the losses if they were to use their air force to their full potential and are forced to use their planes in very limited roles.


2) guerilla campaigns are hard to target by air in particular if mixed with civilians. There are only a few countries on the planet that are fine with being considered war criminal for killing 100 civilians to kill a couple of enemy combatants.
So having an amazing air force against an asimmetric enemy can be relatively pointless.

3) eliminate the enemy air force by any means necessary at the beginning of the conflict. The Israeli during the Israeli Arab wars decided to strike first and eliminate the more numerous enemy air forces before they could take to the skies and be a treath. This could be done both using a smaller air force and the element of surprise or by some sabotage operations.
Nowadays drones could be used too as seen in Ukraine.

4) get a powerful ally by offering them something good in return or by bribing/campaign contribute a good number of their politicians which can declare a "no fly zone" over the area that you are fighting with your enemies which could be enough to keep the enemy air force grounded since they don't want to risk the further involvement of the ally.


Any other ideas?>>63995003 (OP)

>>64007871
My guess is to have Pseudo CAS yourself by utilising small mortar squads or drones.
Would be very usefull if you had drone swarms

>>64007650

US got pushed back to modern south Korea militarily by the Chinese in the Korean war when they almost took the whole country. They US military was just unable to handle a million Chinese soldiers even if very badly armed and lead quite poorly.

On Vietnam the US military constantly failed to achieve any strategic victory. Never managed to take the north and never managed to disable the supply lines of the enemy till the US had to give up out of war fatigue and growing discontent amongst the population over a lack of demonstrable progress.

If the US military was so infallible in Korea and Vietnam they would not have had to force McArthur to quit while raging about wanting to nuke Korea to win. And in Vietnam they would have at least taken Hanoi if it was a true military success only losing from internal opposition.

Both Iraq wars were true military successes even if they were against a relatively weak ally with most of the strongest armies on the planet helping and strategically pointless. The enemy was soundly defeated and only a constant insurrection was the issue.

Afghanistan was not even a war. It was more of a painfully long, large scale police operation against a narco state trying to capture a High value target and just a massive waste of time of money where the US got stuck policing a third world mess of a country.

>>63995003 (OP)
hide in the neighboring country until the enemy goes away

>>64007900
>very badly armed and lead quite poorly.
Completely untrue since a lot of soldiers were experienced veterans from the covil war that just ended. Plus overruning overextended troops isn't impressive especially since MacArthur was told not to go above the 38.
>Never managed to take the north Vietnam
The US was never at war with the North, it was never America's goal to reunite Vietnam. The goal was to stop North Vietnam from fucking with the South just like Afghanistan. A large police action helping South Vietnam put down "rebels"

>>64004828
Why would you think Afghanistan was more understandable of a loss? Vietnam had far better odds.

>>63995010
To the table to an agreement that we would leave and stop killing them that they went back on?

>>64006821
>The US has never attacked a near-peer, so has ever actually won a single air war.

yeah, just hide until they go away.

>>64009095
>Vietnam had far better odds.
The US victory condition in 'Nam was "The destruction of Vietnam as a nation, through a permanent partition." as far as all the locals were concerned.
It had the same issue as Afghanistan - being surrounded by nations who were supporting the resistance in some way and being full of people who knew that they had already defeated an imperial power just a couple years ago.

>>64009095

NTA but I'm pretty sure he's saying that Vietnam was solidly a military defeat (the US Military failing in its goal of successfully pacify South Vietnam/force North Vietnam into a peace agreement in America's favor), whereas most of the initial objectives of the War in Afghanistan (overthrow of the Taliban-ruled government, killing of Osama bin Laden, dismantling of Al Qaeda infrastructure in Afghanistan) were eventually achieved, but mission creep and failures to follow up with that initial success wound up squandering it. Blame for that you can arguably pin on civilian leadership more than the US Military.

>>64009201
Afghanistan wasn't receiving any real training or advisors, guns, artillery, jets, planes, AA, and SAMs. That was my point.

>>63995870
One of the factors in the defeat of germany was that the USSR had managaed to achieve air parity after 1943 due to the weakening of the luftwaffe and the strengthening of the VVS

>doesn't have enough impact to strategically affect war.
Allied air supremacy had a huge effect on their ability to win the war, with air supremacy being an explicit prerequisite for victory

Just don't let it happen by having more air defenses.

>>63997147
>Americans take few casualties because they hide behind their cannon fodder "friends"
This was the bloodiest battle of any war the US has been involved in for the last 50 years. Please point to the cannon fodder we were hiding behind.

>>63999376
Sometimes we hit so hard that spacetime gets disrupted and our opponents retroactively become impoverished goat farmers armed only with sticks.

>>64010877
Iraq had bombers?

Just don't be there when the planes are there.
Engage the lizard brain genetic memory of being hunted by dragons.
It takes time to show up, you have ten or fifteen minutes to steal his gold and women

>>64009147
>*leave
America signed a retreat-y. Doesn't sound like a win but a tapout

>>64010813
OK, here's for Vietnam:
>The ARVN suffered 254,256 recorded combat deaths between 1960 and 1974, with the highest number of recorded deaths being in 1972, with 39,587 combat deaths.[58] According to Guenter Lewy, the ARVN suffered between 171,331 and 220,357 deaths during the war.[11][23]:106 R.J. Rummel estimated that ARVN suffered between 219,000 and 313,000 deaths during the war, including in 1975 and prior to 1960.[19]

Afghanistan in photo. Never ask a man his salary, a woman her age, and an American warhawk how much allies he lost.

>>64007871
>Russia has not just air superiority but effectively air supremacy
ACTUALLY that's not what air supremacy refers to
"Air supremacy" is when the opponent is outright unable to interfere with air operations

>>64008546
>Plus overruning overextended troops isn't impressive
Woooow you can't just take advantage of an opponent's mistake that's so unimpressive

>>64011043
Wow Vietnamese dying in their own war. Crazy.

>>64011043
So when America helps an ally in a civil war they are supposed to do 100% of the fighting?

>>63995003 (OP)
Simple, force them to play by your rules. Break their will to participate at all.

>>64013697
>AKA hide like a little bitch and hope the enemy leaves on their own.

>>64013702
>NOOOOOOOOOO YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO DO THAT IN WAR ONLY COWARDS DON'T STAY STILL IN OPEN FIELD WHILST WE BOMB THEM
The western world is the most pathetic collection of cocksuckers this species will ever witness. Imagine having overwhelming firepower and manpower advantage against people who barely have anything to eat and still having the audacity to bitch about them.
I hope the Russoid monkey loses his shit and exterminates you with with nukes.

>>64013819
based hide and seek champs

>>64013819
Don't cry about weddings getting bombed then

>>64011043
The remarkable thing isn't that 80% of the soldiers who died fighting for South Vietnam were Vietnamese, it's that 20% weren't.

>>63995004
Tell that to the NVA in Vietnam and PLA in Korea. Hell, even the Red Army in 1943 and 1944.

>>64013819
>people who barely have anything to eat
They did though. The 20 year US occupation was by far the most stable and prosperous Afghanistan had been since the 1979 Soviet coup The didn't start going hungry until they defeated us.

>>64014760
The Taliban have been asking America to return lol.

>>64014772
They were asking America to come back a few weeks after they left.

>>64014711
>Tell that to the NVA in Vietnam and PLA in Korea.
I would but they're on the phone with Moscow begging for more free MiGs (and in China's case, more Russian pilots to fly them)

>>63995003 (OP)
Don't give them targets for their birds to hit you? GL with that though especially with high altitude recon drones with absurd loitering times + PGMs

>>64014772
>>64014783
I honestly don't know why they expected the free money tap to stay on, but they clearly did.

>>64014795
>I would but they're on the phone with Moscow begging for more free MiGs (and in China's case, more Russian pilots to fly them)
You are a stupid nigger imagining arguments that aren't there.

I never said they had no air force. I said they didn't have air superiority. Being able to deny air superiority to the other guy can help you win or at least not lose. And it's a lot easier resource-wise to deny air superiority than it is to achieve it.

>>64014842
You know? Fair enough. But this is a thread full of the usual "the US only fights heckin' goat/rice farmers with rusty AKs" third world cope and it's always a good time to remind them that sometimes the goat/rice farmers had state of the art Soviet hardware (and again in China's case, the entire 26,000-man Soviet 64th Fighter Aviation Corps).

>>64010898
LIBYA had bombers