"Bah, Army gibberish" indeed

Says Sergeant Stryker to Wes Dabney:

"We didn't put a gun to [the US Army's] head and force you to buy a clay pigeon. Yeah, we got the A-10 and it's your best friend."

Uhh, no, USAF didn't put the gun to the Army's head. Congress did, in 1947 (Sarge, check your Course 6 materials). They made it against the law for the Army to fly fixed-wing aircraft. The Air Force doesn't want to fly them, either, they aren't glamorous enough. Warthogs will see combat only when the AF is dragged to do so, kicking and screaming. That's why some of them are available in the States to be demonstrated as a next-generation platform for fighting forest fires. So the Army is compelled to try to shoehorn vulnerable helicopters into air support, a role for which they aren't well suited. Helicopters are too easy to bring down; the Army's investments in armor, stealth, and survivability chase diminishing returns, hence "clay pigeon."

The Sarge continues:

"Perhaps your Generals could do some of that General shit and acquire some A-10's of your own. The Air Force has been claiming for years that we don't need them anymore, so maybe your guys can put the squeeze on somebody and get them from us."

That would require an amendment to the National Security Act of 1947, to allow the Army to fly fixed-wing for close air support.

I don't claim that idea as my own (maybe I should, read the comments on Wes's post), but I would support it, if only for the value of countering the hubris of the zipper-suited sun gods.