Letters

We love letters! Write to us at letters@afa.org. To be published, letters should be timely, relevant and concise. Include your name and location. Letters may be edited for space and the editors have final say on which are published.

Completed Puzzle  

I want to thank retired Col. Chuck Debellevue and your magazine for what was a fantastic May/June article [p. 28] about Bob Lodge.

I was in theater flying the F-4 at Ubon during 1972, was a charter member of the Aggressors on my return, and consider myself a serious student of air-to-air combat. But until this article, I never understood how all the pieces fit together to create the 432nd TFW’s record of achievement in aerial combat in 1972.

I now understand. Colonel Debellevue’s telling of the story is not only informative and well written, but is also told with a great deal of humility. He takes great care to give credit to those who in the end helped the author himself achieve what is a unique position in Air Force history.

Lt. Col. Art MacDonald,
USAF (Ret.)
Warner Robins, Ga.

Recommended Reading

This outstanding editorial “Eyes on the Prize” [p. 2]—and, in fact, the entire January/February edition of Air & Space Forces Magazine—is simply the best! Tobias Naegele and the A&SF magazine staff, have captured the challenges our Nation faces with the revitalized Trump administration and its new Pentagon leadership. 

Your readers must take time to read and become educated on the challenges our Air Force and Space Force face, from budget, to flying hours, to threats, to mission focus, to Gen. David Allvin’s on-point statement that “America needs more Air Force, and it needs it now.” 

I urge each air- and space-minded individual to use this content to make the public and our elected leaders aware of what lies ahead. As Naegele states: “The hard work starts now.”

Col. Robert E. “Bob” Largent,
USAF (Ret.)
Former AFA National President
and Chairman of the Board
Harrison, Ariz.

Resource Management

I read with great interest John A. Tirpak’s “Strategy & Policy: New Undergraduate Pilot Training Program Targets 1,500 Pilots Annually,” [March/April, p. 6] and Heather Penney’s [“Fixing the Air Force’s Pilot Crisis,” p. 48.] pertaining to what our Air Force needs to remain a viable combatant—more pilots, more training, more airplanes, more flying hours. I fully agree with all of that, which essentially points the finger at our civilian leadership for not providing the necessary funding for us to get where we need to be. 

 If that is the case, I do not understand the rush to retire older F-15s and the A-10. If in fact we need more aircraft, more flying time, it doesn’t make a lot of sense to send these airframes to the boneyard at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Ariz. I experienced WWII as a kid and the Cold War in B-47s, so it is fair enough for you to label my views as dated.  

However, there are some things which never change—wars never, and I repeat never, are fought and experienced the way we planners (and I was one once) think war will come our way. In 1948, I lived in a refugee camp adjacent to an air base that was to become one of the Berlin Airlift bases of 1948-49. 

We, the United States, had disarmed to a point that once Soviet Dictator Joseph Stalin isolated the city we had no conventional military to speak of, and the A-bomb, it turned out, was not a viable option. The Berlin airlift option was a last straw so to speak, and the Pentagon leadership fully expected it to fail. It didn’t, and as a kid I was inspired by those airlift flyers to become one of them.  

Only a few years later Korea stared us in the face. We were going to fight that war with our new jet, the P-80. Well, the P-80 couldn’t handle the rough field conditions in Korea so the P-51, a WWII fighter, carried the burden. It was not an ideal aircraft for a low-level close air support mission with a liquid cooled engine. 

Come Vietnam the situation was even worse, the U.S. Air Force apparently had forgotten how to build tactical fighters and bombers. So we fought the war with Navy designs: F-4, A-7, B-66.  

Our own inventory of F-102/-106/-104 fighters was useless in that war. Fortunately, the TAC leadership had wanted  to get into the nuclear business with a fighter, that’s where the money was, which resulted in the F-105. Built to carry nukes, but it became one of our principal ground  attack aircraft against  North Vietnam. In the south, the F-100, not ideal for the close air support mission, carried the load, and our unwillingness to listen to the Army’s needs then resulted in the A-10—the best close air support aircraft ever built, bar none.  

Thank you for bearing with me, my point is twofold: one, you fight with what you have; two, war is always different than what you planned for.

For the tactical force it is absolutely essential to be able to cover a broad threat spectrum, and no single airframe has been able do that in the past nor will there be such an airplane in the future. When I served in Ops at Hq USAFE under Col. Wilbur Creech, we had a cartoon on the walls of our offices of a tank flying close air support and counterair—the impossible dream. 

Yes, we need to make our case to our civilian leadership for more aircraft, flying hours and so on, but we also need to look at ourselves for how we are using what we have. And I am making a strong case that we in the past have done a poor job at that, and not doing so well at the present.  

Go make our case to the civilian leadership for what we believe we need for our survival, in the mean time use our on-hand resources as best as we can—and sending them to the boneyard is not a solution for either war or training.

Col. Wolfgang W. E. Samuel,
USAF (Ret.)
Fairfax Station, Va.

What a Difference …

Twenty-nine years ago (Jun. 25, 1996), Iranian-trained and -financed terrorists detonated a sewage truck laden with 20,000 to 30,000 pounds of explosives just outside our Khobar Towers perimeter in Saudi Arabia. During those years whenever terrorism against America was a topic, the haunting “day after” photo showing the remains of the Khobar Towers building nearest the bomb was often included. 

As it did in real time then, that scene still evokes in me deep sadness at the U.S. Air Force casualties (19 killed and 500 wounded) resulting from the blast … and deep anger at the terrorists who attacked us with a cowardly drive-by bombing.  

Within hours of the bombing President Bill Clinton spoke to the nation, “We will pursue this. America takes care of our own. Those who did this must not go unpunished.” 

They were appropriate words … but, tragically, the action that followed was not. Instead of going after the terrorists who killed and wounded the people they are supposed to represent and protect, America’s politicians were determined “not to let a good crisis go the waste” and focused on political agendas. 

 With a fawning media and an Intelligence Community looking for absolution, they had plenty of help. Sadly, what unfolded is not a new story … nor are its results. During the 29 years since the Khobar attack, not only has Iran’s terrorism been responsible formurdering many more Americans, but the wistful thinking and pandering of our political leaders have enabled them to continue doing it. 

The terrorist attack at Khobar Towers is but one example. Its many conflicting investigations underline the point. In the end, the political agendas overrode the facts.  Even the evidence showing Iran’s direct involvement was stifled. Then-FBI Director Louis J. Freeh makes this plain in his book, “My FBI,” as he described the national security adviser’s reaction to the Iran involvement proof. 

 “He was more interested in managing the news than rendering justice … and had brought Script A and B options to spin the story.” Instead of focusing on combating terrorism and improving our national security, the President’s national security adviser was focused on “looking good” politically. 

 With Khobar Towers, the administration decided not to blame or act against the terrorists … but instead, chose to scapegoat those they had sent into harm’s way. After all there were casualties … so as Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.) declared, “Somebody had to have screwed up.”  

The spinning included new buzz words like “force protection” which soon became the Department of Defense’s number one priority. Reorganizing for the new mantra went into hyperdrive as did the promulgation of new policies and regulations. The 4404th Wing that I had commanded with its 11 sites in five countries … one of which was my Hq. in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, where Khobar Towers was located was included. “It was just too big a wing for one commander” was the rationale. 

What good did the buzz words, reorganizations, new policies, and regulations do to thwart the terrorists? The 1998 attack against our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania; the 2000 attack against the USS Cole; the 911 attack against our homeland; the 2012 attack against our Benghazi consulate; the 2021 attack at Abbey Gate; and many others, tell us not very much.   

The prevailing theme in the ensuing investigations remained the same.  Political agendas overrode the facts. “Looking good” politically was more important than improving national security. If either was not true, subsequent attacks could have been significantly mitigated … or avoided altogether.  But they weren’t. (My self-published book, “Collecting the Scars: The Tragedy of Khobar Towers and the Battlefields Beyond” offers more detail.)

America’s action against Iran June 21 was different. This time our political leaders weren’t focused on “looking good” politically. This time they didn’t do the “easy” thing by scapegoating those they sent to war.  This time they focused on America’s national security.  This time they went after the no-kidding bad guys.   

It’s a welcome change. After 29 years, it’s also about damn time. 

Brig. Gen. Terry Schwalier,
USAF (Ret.)
Knoxville, Tenn.

Waiting in the Wings

Who knew when your 2025 Almanac edition went to press that a future cover photo and feature story would be buried on page 161. Depicted there is a B-2 Spirit with a GBU-57 Massive Ordinance Penetrator (MOP) just emerging from its belly. 

Overnight, that tag team has become more famous than the Gallagher brothers wrestling duo that I used to devotedly watch on B&W TV in my youth. 

Depending on your political persuasion and media outlets of choice, opinions will likely vary on the long-term benefits of the B-2’s bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities during Operation Midnight Hammer. 

There can be no doubt however that from a mission perspective things went off seemingly without a hitch. No offense to Bobby Thomson of the New York baseball Giants, but this impressive joint-coalition endeavor will go down in the annals of airpower history as the “shot heard ‘round the world.”
  I’ve never been prouder to be a member of the Air Force family! I can’t wait to read your magazine’s future minute-by-minute rundown on this momentous military undertaking.  

Col. Bill Malec,
USAF (Ret.)
O’Fallon, Ill.

Checklist

With regards to the June 21 U.S. Air Force B-2 bombing on Iran’s nuclear enrichment complex, some of the critical takeaways from the Fordow attack include:

1.   Stealth works.

2.  Global Reach is essential.

3.  Precision is vital.

4.  Excellence in personnel and training is a must. 

William Thayer 
San Diego

To Each Their Own

The stylistic eagle graphics that appear in the Almanac 2025, on the cover and elsewhere, are beautiful but childish. Dressing an eagle with combat gear may appeal to a 9 year old who likes fantasy video games, but sends an entirely different message to serious adult readers.

Col. Dennis Beebe,
USAF (Ret.)
Solvang, Calif.