Do Special Operations live up to their role in Air Power support?

[Old Eagle]

What about AFSOC's advisory role? In the past, they had maintained a small, very specialized advisory squadron. That has reportedly been expanded now. The Air Force clearly needs a capability to advise in a diverse environment on a number of airframes, sustainment tasks, tactics and doctrine. Without the ability to help host nation air forces, USAF risks being mired in conflicts even more than ground forces. IT's not all about flying ISO U.S. forces.

[Peacedog]

The issue with the USAF is more fundamental than that. The bottom line is that the USAF as an institution does not want to change or add anything in its basic mission set. In fact, the USAF as an institution wants to further reduce its mission set to its self perceived traditional “core” missions.

This is, of course, completely delusional behavior. The reason the USAF is in a budget crunch in the first place is the, very accurate, perception that the service has not done much in the war on terror realm. Additionally, as a service it has made the fewest changes to accommodate post cold War reality.

A consistent issue brought up to the USAF, and one their leadership actively chooses to completely ignore, is that a military is valued off of what it does today. Most of the core missions of the USAF fall into the category of contingency capabilities, that have little utility outside of a very narrow band of activity.

The central problem facing the USAF, and this goes back to the heart of your AFSOC question, is that the USAF as an institution does not want to expand its capabilities list beyond what it is currently performing. In fact, it wants to reduce this, but it does not want to cease performing any of its traditional roles as well. In essence, the USAF is engaging in self induced irrelevancy.

[Entropy]

The issue with the USAF is more fundamental than that. The bottom line is that the USAF as an institution does not want to change or add anything in its basic mission set. In fact, the USAF as an institution wants to further reduce its mission set to its self perceived traditional “core” missions.

Actually, the problem is the Air Force is constantly trying to reinvent itself. In my view, it's trying to change too much and too often.

This is, of course, completely delusional behavior. The reason the USAF is in a budget crunch in the first place is the, very accurate, perception that the service has not done much in the war on terror realm. Additionally, as a service it has made the fewest changes to accommodate post cold War reality.

On your first point, the war on terror is not an air war. What more would you have the AF do? On your second point, I think you need to look at some history. SAC, for example, was the Air Force's most important organization through most of the service's history. SAC isn't around anymore - it was disestablished 19 years ago as a consequence of the end of the Cold War. I'm not sure how getting rid of your premiere Cold War organization is failing to change to post-Cold War reality.

A consistent issue brought up to the USAF, and one their leadership actively chooses to completely ignore, is that a military is valued off of what it does today. Most of the core missions of the USAF fall into the category of contingency capabilities, that have little utility outside of a very narrow band of activity.

Policymakers like contingency operations and like those capabilities. I spent almost all of the 1990's doing contingency operations when I was in the Navy, for example. We're still doing them today. I think policymakers would disagree with your assertion that "a military is valued off of what it does today."

The central problem facing the USAF, and this goes back to the heart of your AFSOC question, is that the USAF as an institution does not want to expand its capabilities list beyond what it is currently performing. In fact, it wants to reduce this, but it does not want to cease performing any of its traditional roles as well. In essence, the USAF is engaging in self induced irrelevancy.

What specifically should the AF be doing that it is not doing? What about UAV's and so-called Cyber-warfare - those are two areas where the AF has not only tried to expand, but tried to control almost the whole ball of wax.