Military Aircraft Based at Civilian Airports.
 

I see this happening in many places in the world and it is something I am not that keen on seeing.

Surely the civilian airport which hosts military aircraft, is a valid military target, in time of conflict, thereby putting innocent civilians at risk. I am aware we fight a war to win at all costs, so I guess it doesn't really matter does it?

As with all things is probably a question of economics.

I would also suggest that a majority of civil/mil combined airports started out as military airfields, so it is more a case that civilians now use military airfields rather than the military moving into civilian airports.

As you rightly point out, it is economics, and convenience for passengers with the increase in local airports.

Y_G

All airports, civil or military are an early target in a time of war.

Just because its not military now doesn't stop it being used as such in a time of conflict.

Autobahns in Eastern & Western Europe were planned to be used as military runways during the Cold War and such strips of highway still offer that as a planned facility in many places on the Globe today. Does that mean it's time to hand in your driving licence, 'hisnamesake'?!!:ugh:

By the way, does your:

mean to suggest that those in the military are guilty of some ill-thought out charge (of yours)?

Foldie:bored:

PS. Thinks, time somebody woke up and smelt the coffee!!!!

Better move all those barracks out of town/city centres, and stop people going shopping in uniform.

Wait for it - we already did that....:ok:

Thanks for the replies.

Would any of you be prepared to set up a machine gun to fire from a hospital, or from a group hostages or POW's using them as shelter?

I am intrigued to know where the "line would be drawn".

Perhaps people should check out the Trolls are still being fed thread.

I would have no worries about machine-gunning an un-armed Teddy Bear in a Red Cross uniform while his parachute was hung up in a tree.

Now go and do your homework.

In the sand. It's in the rules. "We will fight them on the beaches" - WS Churchill 4th June 1940.

Play with Teddy if you have no homework.

Get real. In total war there is no such 'line'

".

Pure genius.
10 out of 10 AA
:D

hisnamesake,

This thread, and you also it seems, have no point.

You are the weakest link, goodbye.

No but I know somebody who would?

Ah, sh*t, no! His own guys hanged him in Baghdad a few years ago, so that won't work.

Hey this is fun. Keep em coming, ferchrisesake!

Foldie

Be intrigued no more, this is "where the line is drawn"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of...Project_(RULAC)

I didn't realise they had Trolls in Bolivia :)

So if you're not prepared to do that? Well what the hell is the tax payer paying you for? To win a war or fight it with your hands behind your backs?

I dont have to tell you, our dear enemy the Taliban don't give a rats about the "rules". So are you there to win or loose?! If you are going to stick to the rules you will loose.

No I am not a troll, just an old civilian pilot coming to the end of his career, who has been spared the horrors of war and may that continue. I did ask what I considered a pertinent question. I received a few smart arsed replies so I added another question to feed the know it alls.

Bored now but unfortunately the Mods won't allow me to tell you where to go!:bored:

No one likes a smart arse

Military aircraft, based at jointly operated airfields, could also be at risk from suicide bombers trying to blow up airliners, so it cuts both ways!

If you can't play by the fair rules then its time to give up. Whats the point of fighting 'them' if you are the same as them??
PS. Military units rarely get targeted, they go for underground stations/buses/market places/civilian airliners/etc. If you use your logic from post 1, the SAFEST place would be an airfield with military aircraft. :ok: