In fact, many of these lessons are supported only by a selective presentation of data. It's certainly not uncommon for contractors to paint their products in the most favorable light. And, in some cases, I would agree that Pentagon officials overstated the capabilities of various PGMs. Since it was in the best interests of the war effort for the Pentagon to highlight the successes of precision strikes and not suboptimal results, perhaps this is understandable. It is alarmingly common in the Air Force as well.
Some proponents offer the crutch of an automated targeting process.
We really need experts and a great deal of study. Or perhaps automation seeks to fill a void in targeting and campaign planning expertise. This void was exacerbated by the termination of the intelligence officer and enlisted targeteer career fields. Or perhaps the root cause is the trepidation we Americans feel at planning offensive operations before the need arises. We don't feel right making these plans, so we wait until there's a need to go on the offensive.