06-16-2008, 10:19 PM
Pardon me. please insert "I think," "I believe", and "to the best of my understanding" in the preceding post. I think that the actual interaction between cavalry and infantry is one of the most hard fought of pre-modern mil-his subjects--blood is often spilled on wargaming forums--and I don't wish to sound like I have all the answers.
I do like to see the 'technological" argument put in tis place, however--as an argument, but not THE argument. We live in a period where an F-14 with an AIM-54 is just better than a MiG 25 and any combination of missiles... and where that can be a determinent in battle. But that argument does not really have the same validity in the past...or at least deserves to be carefully examined.
I do like to see the 'technological" argument put in tis place, however--as an argument, but not THE argument. We live in a period where an F-14 with an AIM-54 is just better than a MiG 25 and any combination of missiles... and where that can be a determinent in battle. But that argument does not really have the same validity in the past...or at least deserves to be carefully examined.
Qui plus fait, miex vault.
