Quote Originally Posted by Marc View Post
In summary: airpower is the best way to win a war and if it is not, we should not go to war. Allow me to present one concrete example of the implications of this type of circular reasoning. As Warden concedes himself:
Marc, he says usually in the article not always.



Quote Originally Posted by Marc
This means that, if Warden had been President George W. Bush's strategist in 1989, Manuel A. Noriega would still be the dictator of Panama. To paraphrase Slapout9's statement: "when people say Airpower can not bring democracy to Panama what they really mean is that Military power can not bring democracy to Panama." Well, if you read a history book about Panama, I think you will have to admit that the facts contradict Warden's circular reasoning.
No, it doesn't. It means what he said that if you want to take someone into physical custody then you will need another type of military force besides Airpower.

Marc, a great deal of what Warden talks about is from the late 50's and early 60's. Parallel attack in Army speak is Distributed Operations. Planing back wards from the Future Picture picture is the same thing I learned and as Ken has pointed used to be taught as Back Planning in the Army. Warden will tell you himself that pretty much everything he has said has been around for a while, he is just bringing it back up as a way forward for our country. Having grown up in that era and seen some of the plans for what our country was going to be as opposed to what it has become I am a true believer. We have never truly exploited Air and Space Power like it could be done and the Army has nothing to fear from that.

General James M. Gavin used to say this "Never send a Soldier when you should send a guided missile." That is a simplified version of what Warden is saying, except now we are entering a world where we should be exploiting precision of impact and precision of effect. Again if you read some of the older Army Airborne Warfare theories you will find there are a lot of similarities and a few critical differences that if we exploited them we would end up being very complimentary forces.