The US did not achieve their goals is the bottom line. Perhaps another example, the korean war. In both cases the US had the overwhelming advantage including nu

The US did not achieve their goals is the bottom line. Perhaps another example, the korean war. In both cases the US had the overwhelming advantage including nukes. Your point is wrong, or right, or needs tightening up so that it can be decided as wrong or right. There is validity in your point but it's not the whole thing, or there would have been unambiguous victory for the US in the cases I gave. The problem here is not jets/technology but that you won't acknowledge when you're on shaky ground; the problem is now your judgement. You know what, that's a metaphor for so many of the ills and shortcomings of humanity. You will lose nothing and gain much by just putting your hands up to it and rethinking, but you won't (we're all guilty of that to various degrees, me also). Your position may be wrong or right or something in between, but it needs refining and thinking through first. Bugs in software are often seen as failings, and they are, but they can be turned into an asset. People's questioning your views here may indicate where you need to rethink (not necessarily change your mind, perhaps just refine and stabilise your position, or perhaps abandon it). Treat their questions and counterclaims as an asset too.