Personal knowledge of the F-15 and F-111 weapons systems (13+ years); Two quick sources on a quick search, you'll have to find the rest. 1) MIL-HDBK-516A, para 7.4.3 (for engines); 2) http://www.wrcoc-aic.org/Archive/RS/RS06/RS06_7.pdf (Note: Summary states that the B-52 is required to be hardened against EMP).

The real problem when installing this will be the LOSS of weight...specifically, the center of gravity for every single airframe will now have to be recomputed, and they will find that most of the wire is in the forward fuselage area (where most avionics are located). This means lead weights will have to be added to the forward section to balance out the loss of weight. I know, because I've already had to do it. We had a test F-111 in the early 90's configured with fiber optics. The conversion saved 650lbs of weight, but we had to add 400lbs of lead weights back in to preserve the CG.

Not sure what you're asking, but each military aircraft has several grounding points that use a standard RCA jack for the aircraft and an alligator clip (OK, a big one) on the other end of the wire that grounds the aircraft to a common ground in the concrete. As for in the air, there are electro-static dischargers on the trailing edges that help dissipate charges that build up, but in the case of a lightning strike, well, just about anything goes...

Military aircraft certified for nuclear ops are EMP certified, for instance, all the bombers, the F-15E, etc.

From the citation:

And so you would stop using Belo, Cox, Gannett, Media General, and Post-Newsweek and burn them with fire as well?

We weren't allowed to bring in cell phones to our polling place. One of the poll workers asked if we brought one in and also made us open up coats/handbags to prove it.

The "truth" is that Hussein provoked, prodded, and pushed the U.S. into this bloody war. All Hussein had to do was abide by even MOST of the UN mandates and he'd probably still be alive and torturing Shi'ites and Kurds for profit/pleasure. No, Hussein chose to ignore every one of the mandates, fired daily upon coalition forces enforcing the ceasefire, tried to kill the former president of the U.S., and finally became such a pain in the ass for the U.S. that his removal outweighed the positive effects of keeping the Shi'ites in Iran contained. The WMD argument was one of a number of all valid reasons to invade. All Hussein had to do was allow the inspectors to do their job, then get the stuff they'd hidden in Syria back when the inspectors left.
So, in 2001 you have Al-Qaida operating out of Afghanistan with pretty much marginal resources, inflicting a serious blow to the U.S. and Hussein starts making overtures to them (the enemy of my enemy is my friend-with-limited-trust-because-we-still-hate-each-other kind of thing). That would give Al-Qaida a huge technological support base and resources not available in Afghanistan, and allow Hussein to seriously poke not only the U.S. but all the coalition nations in the eye and be able to claim "It wasn't me". Much as Pakistan has and is currently doing with the Taliban and Al-Qaida in Afghanistan. As a result, it was time for Hussein to go. He only has himself to blame.

As for warzone casualties, various organizations keep trying to paint war as an exact science, often helped by idiots in the press who know nothing of the military, pretend to be wartime correspondents, and become infatuated with the latest bomb or gizmo, falling victim to the 4-color ads/brochures and salesmen of various companies supplying weapons to the military. Fratricide is an unfortunate by-product of conducting movement warfare with long range weapons (hell, there were probably fratricides in the bow and arrow times as well), and the U.S. has led the way in reducing this aspect with a list of improvements too long to post here, in not only procedures but equipment as well.
As for being "extreme", of course the U.S. in combat is extreme, it's how you WIN a war, unlike the Dutch who refused to fight and left a U.S./Brit joint patrol to die in an Afghan shootout that had already claimed a U.S. life and wounded several Brits. The U.S. un-learned being "extreme" after WWII and re-learned it after VietNam. As for "shooting up the British", the U.S. has taken it's share of blue on blue hits as well, some from U.S. forces, others from coalition forces.

Wrong; The military has NEVER painted this, or any war, as "an exact, precise business." Show me the citation where someone IN the military said "War is an exact, precise business." You won't find it.

They studied 6 drivers "with spotless records" behind the wheel. I would argue that they could gain valuable information by also studying poor drivers and teaching the program to a) avoid such behavior in it's own driving; and b) learn how to react to poor drivers out there on the road (e.g. passing on blind corners, turning without signaling, aggressive/NASCAR type diving into limited spaces, etc)