Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 51 of 51

Thread: Airpower’s Crucial Role in Irregular Warfare

  1. #41
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Hi Rob and everyone else, I will posts some more later tonight I still have afew things to attend to. But like MacArthur I shall return. Quick thoght for everyone my sources say the Air Force is looking at the British position in Iraq in 1919 and how Air Power was used to allow a final settlement. They think Air Power could be used in a similar way in the current Iraq situation.

  2. #42
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by slapout9 View Post
    Quick thoght for everyone my sources say the Air Force is looking at the British position in Iraq in 1919 and how Air Power was used to allow a final settlement. They think Air Power could be used in a similar way in the current Iraq situation.
    Presumably they're well aware that this largely involved the punitive bombing of civilians. To quote future Air Marshal Arthur "Bomber" Harris from his time as an RAF squadron leader during the Iraqi uprising:

    "The Arab and Kurd now know", reported Squadron Leader Harris after several such raids, "what real bombing means within 45 minutes a full-sized village can be practically wiped out, and a third of its inhabitants killed or injured, by four or five machines which offer them no real target, no opportunity for glory as warriors, no effective means of escape."

  3. #43
    Council Member Tom Odom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    DeRidder LA
    Posts
    3,949

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by slapout9 View Post
    Hi Rob and everyone else, I will posts some more later tonight I still have afew things to attend to. But like MacArthur I shall return. Quick thoght for everyone my sources say the Air Force is looking at the British position in Iraq in 1919 and how Air Power was used to allow a final settlement. They think Air Power could be used in a similar way in the current Iraq situation.
    Presumably they also look at it as a case of pure suppression in the name of maintaining the Empire--it worked when you could get away with for a while. But Iraq never became a stable gem in the imperial crown. Johnny Frost (2d Para--Arnhem) begins his memoirs discussing how screwed up RAF policy was in Iraq prior to WWII.

    Then in certain quarters we beat up the evolution of the Baath movement and wonder where it got some of its ties to Hitler's Germany. I mean really the Iraqis had every reason to absolutely love the British the same way the Egyptians did. We could in a similar vein cast Hiroshima and Nagasaki as pre-emptive COIN via airpower.

    Anyway, Slap hope things are OK fpr you and yours

    Best

    Tom

  4. #44
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Hi All, back for a little while. I don't think the Air Force has a real Air Power theory. I think part of them have a Bomber theory and part of them have a Fighter theory, but since Warden retired they have lost what was becoming a general theory of military power but that has changed rather dramatically. I think it is on page 111 (The Air Campaign) where Warden list 5 general circumstances where Air Power should be and should not be used as the main force. Two instances in particular: If a land objective needs to seized fast, ground forces are the key force, the second is a guerrilla war where Air Power doesn't have anything to target in the traditional since.

    Thanks Tom, things are starting to level out.

    Here is a link to chapter 9 of "The Air Campaign" for some reason the pages are not numbered, so scroll down to the section on Sea Power to read the section I was refering to. The whole chapter is good if you want to read all of it to really get the point.

    http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/warden/wrdchp09.htm
    Last edited by slapout9; 10-10-2007 at 01:35 AM. Reason: Add Link

  5. #45
    Moderator Steve Blair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    Actually, Slap, I think you're mistaken about the Air Force and the air power theory. What we've been seeing since McPeak and Desert Storm/Gulf War I is a regression to the classic air power theory...that is, a unified air force that is capable of destroying any opponent and achieving victory cheaply through the air. Don't forget that Mitchell was a proponent of integrated air power, even though it's his bomber experiments that got him the most notice. Spaatz was also a unified air guy, and LeMay pushed to absorb TAC in the late 1950s (though it was more for a diversified atomic strike capability). They've been adding new layers (space and cyberspace), but the idea has remained very consistent since the early days.

    Warden was more articulating a general theory of application, but it was very much in line with the core air power theory. If you notice, they don't really change the way they do business...they look for ways to fit current affairs into that business structure. Again...for many it's a matter of finding targets for ordnance.

    It's a shame, too, because there is some innovative thinking that goes on in some corners of the organization (as our own LawVol has shown through his own writings). But it has yet to gain real traction in the air power sandpit.
    "On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
    T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War

  6. #46
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Hi Steve, you are right. It is just my interpretation about the bomber mafia and fighter mafia. Warden reorganized the Air Command and Staff College just before his retirement to try to implement his theory of a Unified Theory of Conflict (my interpretation) since then they have pretty much gone back to business as usual.

  7. #47
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    717

    Default And here I thought that I'd been set straight.

    Quote Originally Posted by slapout9 View Post
    Hi Steve, you are right. It is just my interpretation about the bomber mafia and fighter mafia. Warden reorganized the Air Command and Staff College just before his retirement to try to implement his theory of a Unified Theory of Conflict (my interpretation) since then they have pretty much gone back to business as usual.
    I feel so horn-swoggled, slapout.

    But if Warden himself was trying to clarify things and set things right, then maybe someone down the line will pick up on his Unified Thoery of Conflict. As you know the man personally, I'm sure your take on his intentions are quite correct. There may still be hope for the Higher Air Force types and COIN. I'm just not going to hold my breath while I'm waiting for it to happen.

  8. #48
    Moderator Steve Blair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    I really wish that when Warden revised "The Air Campaign" he would have done some deeper thinking and gotten rid of many of his (poor) historical examples. The thinking there is so deeply rooted in traditional Air Power talk. For example:
    First, territory is a dangerous enchantress in war. Serious wars are rarely won by capturing territory, unless that territory includes a vital political or economic center of gravity, the loss of which precludes continuing the war. The capture of France in 1940, significant though it was, did not win the war for the Germans. France was not the center of gravity of the anti-Axis coalition -- even before the United States entered the conflict. After World War II, the United States, not Western Europe, became the center of gravity in any conflict between the Soviets and the western powers. Territory may well be the political objective of a campaign, but it rarely should be the military objective. Territory will be disposed of at the peace conference as a function of the political, military, and economic situation at the war's end.
    Even though he trots out the capture of France, he ignores the fact that Hitler didn't consider France the center of gravity for the anti-Axis coalition. It was a piece that had to be taken to either attack Great Britain or to secure his back door for the fight with what he considered his real enemy: the Soviet Union. And if territory "rarely should be the military objective" then we're in trouble. While he only mentions 2-3 cases where air power shouldn't be the main option, he finds more cases where air power should be the main option and goes into more detail to support his case. He also ignores cases where Navy air was more suited for a task...focusing on Kenny's operations supporting MacArthur and ignoring the carrier raids into the Sea of Japan (and other areas) that did much to cripple Japan's coastal shipping and throw off its defensive planning. He also ignores the non-combat impact of air power. Airlift and other assets can have a major impact in COIN, yet he says air power is of marginal use against a self-sustaining guerrilla enemy. Traditional air power perhaps...a non-traditional application certainly not!

    I always took Warden's Unified Theory as being more an argument for total air power cloaked behind the talk of jointness that the Air Force often brings out when it wants to absorb or claim primacy in a function or area. "The Air Campaign" has some very sound operational dictums in it...some are even visionary. But he falls short when he starts looking at elements beyond targeting and targeting theory (and his 5 Rings and COG talk is really about targeting).

    We use "The Air Campaign" as a textbook for a course here, so I've read it more times than is likely healthy.... I'll stop now....
    "On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
    T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War

  9. #49
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Norfolk View Post
    I feel so horn-swoggled, slapout.

    :
    Norfolk, Dawg boy I new you were from Alabama.

    I am trying to get the word out... here is a link to check out.

    http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ead.php?t=4065

    Steve Blair, You do know that the 5 rings theory had not been invented when he wrote the Air Campaign don't you? That whole theory came later on, even though their are elements in the Air Campaign. Besides you should come to the course, get all those rich college folks you know to pony up some cash!! Warden and his theory have been used in the design of several war games and I know you are into that so you would fit right in.

    Pretty good article here on how people were starting to learn and apply the theory.
    http://www.airpower.au.af.mil/airchr.../cc/bence.html
    Last edited by slapout9; 10-10-2007 at 11:07 PM. Reason: add stuff

  10. #50
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    717

    Default Well, I AM from the Deep South...

    Quote Originally Posted by slapout9 View Post
    Norfolk, Dawg boy I new you were from Alabama.

    I am trying to get the word out... here is a link to check out.

    http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ead.php?t=4065

    Steve Blair, You do know that the 5 rings theory had not been invented when he wrote the Air Campaign don't you? That whole theory came later on, even though their are elements in the Air Campaign. Besides you should come to the course, get all those rich college folks you know to pony up some cash!! Warden and his theory have been used in the design of several war games and I know you are into that so you would fit right in.

    Pretty good article here on how people were starting to learn and apply the theory.
    http://www.airpower.au.af.mil/airchr.../cc/bence.html
    slapout, and a country boy, and my old man was born just outside Huntsville, just that was in ON, not AL, sorry to say. But I don't much care for Yankees either, and I have been to East and Central Tennessee (though I hear that some of the folks in East Tennessee were Yankee sympathizers during the Recent Unpleasantness), but sadly I did not cross the state line and head to Montgomery.

    This is a short, sweet, and to the point short essay on the vital elements of Air Power Strategy that even a knuckle-dragging brute such as myself can follow; Norfolk paraphrase Euripides - "UGH!". This is a good read, and its brevity just adds to its charm.

    And thanks slapout for the link to Warden's seminar.

  11. #51
    Moderator Steve Blair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by slapout9 View Post
    Steve Blair, You do know that the 5 rings theory had not been invented when he wrote the Air Campaign don't you? That whole theory came later on, even though their are elements in the Air Campaign. Besides you should come to the course, get all those rich college folks you know to pony up some cash!! Warden and his theory have been used in the design of several war games and I know you are into that so you would fit right in.

    Pretty good article here on how people were starting to learn and apply the theory.
    http://www.airpower.au.af.mil/airchr.../cc/bence.html
    Yeah...I knew he came up with the 5 rings later, but you can see most major elements of it in Air Campaign.

    Rich college folks? Ya gotta be faculty to get paid to fly around and blow hot air. Me? I'm lowly staff. We're lucky if we get paid on time...and even at close to top admin grade I make about what an E-3 does...without the housing allowance and other bennies.....
    "On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
    T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •