ImnoMensa
New Member
I am having a problem with understanding why we used so many Tomahawk missiles in Libya.
I know that Tomahawks are a great weapon and can be used to keep our pilots safe and deliver a lot of explosives on site with accuracy.
So far in Libya I have heard no reports of Libyan aircraft leaving the ground to challenge the coalition. Some small reports of anti-aircraft, but they haven't hit anything.
Don't we have regular bombs anymore and aren't they cheaper than Tomahawks?
Don't we have A-10's in the area that can use rockets and drop bombs?
Why are we using up missiles (tomahawks) that cost a million a pop to do the job that could be done so much cheaper?
It looks to me like a terrible waste of an expensive resource, and when we run out of them we will have to use the old style bombs anyway.
Note: This is only a question as to why we picked a really expensive weapon to do the job that could be done as well with a cheaper one, not a question as to WTF we are there in the first place.
I know that Tomahawks are a great weapon and can be used to keep our pilots safe and deliver a lot of explosives on site with accuracy.
So far in Libya I have heard no reports of Libyan aircraft leaving the ground to challenge the coalition. Some small reports of anti-aircraft, but they haven't hit anything.
Don't we have regular bombs anymore and aren't they cheaper than Tomahawks?
Don't we have A-10's in the area that can use rockets and drop bombs?
Why are we using up missiles (tomahawks) that cost a million a pop to do the job that could be done so much cheaper?
It looks to me like a terrible waste of an expensive resource, and when we run out of them we will have to use the old style bombs anyway.
Note: This is only a question as to why we picked a really expensive weapon to do the job that could be done as well with a cheaper one, not a question as to WTF we are there in the first place.