You don't need an air force to challenge an enemies command of the air. Anti-aircraft fire and surface to air missiles are quite effective.

Well at least they give the aircraft some motion, unlike the engines!

Really ? thats amazing.
So if Taliban decided to deploy AA weaponry to contest the air corps air supremacy then the air corps would only have air superiority, unless they deployed enough AA so that no side had an advantage in which case they would have air parity.
So I have to ask , since you wrote....
....did your military experience not educate you to the meaning of the terms used?

No Troll, AA is a defensive weapon only You cannot achieve parity in anything when all you can do is defend and react.

You really don't understand the terms at all do you

I know what you think they mean but since I have heard them used by professionals to describe real world situations it's my definition we'll be going by.

So you do know the definition of the phrases.

Ah so someone is wrong because you want to only use your own definitions of the phrases .

OK the real world, what stages of the Russian occupation of Afghanistan would you label with your personal definitions of the three terms?
Or you could do the same with French operations in Vietnam .

Perhaps if you do both examples then the world can see what your definition is and try and match it with the usual definition.

I'd rather the Russians have air supremacy then the lolwaffles.:rotfl:

You may have need of this


http://img40.imageshack.us/img40/507...lsprayxj41.jpg

Is that the ad hominen version in the can, recomended for use by those who are unable to debate.

If you don't understand just think for a moment . Can you think of any rational examination of either of the campaigns I mentioned in response to augusts claim that would remotely support his claim?

Nope, that's the ad nauseam version in the can. The type used for those who are repetitive in their attempts to be subjective and dismissive of other peoples viewpoints on numerous threads.

Personally, I enjoy a good debate.....but only when mutual respect is a fundamentally accepted part of the process.