Results 1 to 20 of 94

Thread: Understanding Airmen

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Moderator Steve Blair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    But you also have to remember the institutional "face" of the Air Force...which remains victory through air power (although space power and dominance of cyberspace have both been added to the formula).

    I don't deny that there is some very interesting research going on within Big Blue, or that there are pockets and individuals that are looking beyond the basic framework...but when was the last time you saw someone with equal (or higher) rank come out with an article contradicting or arguing with what Dunlap and others have written? The public face remains very much the same.

    Every large organization is complicated and diverse. That's the nature of a large organization. But if you look at the official writings, the tone set by those in authority, you'll still find the old mantra. The Air Force as an organization (not as individuals) has been dragged into other roles (sometimes kicking and screaming), but the larger whole still struggles to get back to that familiar "high ground" of air power.

    No matter what some might think, this isn't Air Force bashing. It's recognizing the reality of the ORGANIZATION as a whole, not the parts within that organization. As far as the organization being "over" the Second World War....I'd have to disagree. The terms have changed, but many within the senior leadership still look for victory through technology and preferably air power. Not all the individuals are like that. There are some great thinkers within the AF...many who are willing and eager to think outside the conventional borders and come up with new roles and ways of doing business. But they are all too often silenced or ignored.

    We may see changes in the next 10 years or so...as the next generation of officers (including many who've come into the AF from other services) rise in rank. But I have yet to be convinced that the ORGANIZATION as a whole has changed. Some parts, yes, and there are some interesting steps being taken. But those parts have yet to impact the whole in a major way.

    And it's not just the AF. Look at the tug of war within the Army regarding COIN and 3-24. I tend to single out the AF because as an organization they have been the most consistent at shutting out current events in favor of the war they'd like to fight (one could make an argument for the Navy as well in this category).

    And Norfolk, I'd also propose that the AF ideology springs from both technology and pilots/aircraft. In many ways you can't discuss one without bringing in the other. And with reference to CAS, one of the former Chiefs of Staff (McPeak) argued toward the end of his tenure that CAS should be given back to the Army, with them and the Marines given primacy for the mission.
    "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

  2. #2
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    717

    Thumbs up In its Heart of Hearts, the Air Force has not really changed.

    Very much agreed Steve, and as far as AF ideology deriving from both pilots/aircraft and technology, I agree very much as well, it's just that with my political philosopher's schooling, I may be biased to look for the qualititative rather than the quantitative, and trip over the stone blocks as I search for the fortifications.

    Both Culpeper and Slapout9 are correct to the extent that the Air Force is very a diverse organization, but how many Air Observers, CCT's, PJ's, SOF Crewmen, etc., make Chief of Staff? For that matter, how many rise to 3- or 4-star flag ranks; not too many. Most of the 3- and 4-stars are fighter, bomber, materiel, even intelligence types. A few strategic airlift transport types make their way to the upper levels on the stairway to the stars. By and large the guys who make it to the top (and in charge of doctrine) are those thinking in terms of the Big One, and those fighting small wars or unconventional ones amount to their (elite) cupbearers at most. This certainly doesn't detract from the vital and gutsy work that the PJ's, the CCT's, the SOF Aircrew, and the Air Observers do; but it very much testifies to their being marginalized at the top.

    Culpeper (and Slapout too, being an ex-jumper himself about the time RDF was formed) are completely correct in that the Air Force was compelled to field a serious and reliable strategic airlift capability to take the Army's light divisions wherever they needed to go (especially if that destination was the Middle East) - no more Lebanon 1958's, where the Army's Airborne Divisions (STRAC) couldn't get there and tried to send front-line troops from Germany because the Air Force couldn't live up to its committments for adequate strategic airlift to get them there; that really burned the Army in general and the Airborne in particular, especially when Ike had to send in the Marines to do the job. But even now, the Air Force can't do much more than airlift a single light division (which is still more than anyone else) and keep it supplied for a month or so; the rest of XVIII Airborne Corps has to either cool their heels or board ships just like the Heavy Divisions.

    But in its institutional heart of hearts, the Air Force remains essentially unchanged. Unrestricted, Total War theory remains the core of its doctrine. The Five Rings Theory remains unpurged from Air Force doctrine and teaching, and that theory is less than 20 years' old (well past WWII, Korea, and even surviving the Cold War). It's somewhat ironic that Fielded Military Forces is the outermost, and therefore the least essential, ring to be targeted by Air Power. Targetting the Population remains a tier above this, and targeting the Infrastructure (which we did in Iraq in 1991, Kosovo/Serbia in 1998, and Iraq again in 2003), and the destruction or damage which was inflicted on said in 2003 is dogging SSO ops in Iraq 4 years later - Iraqis are very ticked that their water and electricity is spotty at times, or even most of the time. Above that of course you get to Systems Essentials and finally the Leadership.

    This is what the institutional Air Force still very much sees as how to fight war. That means air superiority and missiles/bombs on target, the bigger the better, and the more, the merrier, until the enemy utterly collapses under the full force of aerial bombardment. The reason that the Air Force doesn't deliberately target the civilian population (a la WWII and Korea) is that sort of thing just won't be tolerated morally by most of the public or politically by most of the political leadership. Yet the civilian population (and infrastructure even more so) remains a greater priority target in Air Force doctrine than enemy troops on the field (and no new-build CAS aircraft has been built for the AF since 1982, but F-16's designed for tactical air strikes are supposed to replace the A-10, hmmm...)

    This is not at all consistent with the proper conduct of small wars (or unconventional wars) where you're trying to protect the population against the enemy and rebuild their lives, infrastructure, and their trust in someone carrying a gun (or flying a fighter-bomber). Even when honest mistakes are made, and a fighter-bomber takes out someone's village or house or field in error, and killing civilians, all the progress that the troops on the ground may have made with these people is completely undone; in some areas, such incidents have made it impossible to even try to reach out to this people at all. And, for that matter, even General Wars must not be waged as Total Wars; the enemy population, and civilization must be preserved; good Armies instinctively understand this in their bones, as their true mission isn;t the extermination of the enemy, but the preservation of civilization. Total War is a descent into barbarism, or worse.

    When the Five Rings Theory (and its ilk) are formally and finally ditched (or extensively revised to remove civilians and civilian infrastructure from targetting and destruction) and the Air Force is led once in a while by PJ's or SOF types, then I think that the Air Force will have really changed, in its institutional heart of hearts, and for the better.

    Personally, I think that the Air Force should include the Airborne (I'm going to be shot dawn and hung at sunrise in some Airborne quarters after they read this - especially since I'm a leg), just as the Navy includes the Marines, and then the higher echelons of the Air Force might have more of an interest in, exposure to, and direct involvement with, land warfare in general and small wars in particular. I'd also give the CAS mission (except for the Air Force Airborne) and planes like the A-10 and its Air Observer variant, the excellent OA-10 to the Army; I'd also give (and this is what is just practice anyway) Strategic Air Defence to the Air Force (and let the Army concentrate on tactical and operational AD of Army ground forces).

  3. #3
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Thumbs down Hung is too easy...

    Aside from the arch heresy of suggesting that Airborne forces should belong to the Air force, you have compounded the felony by suggesting -- nay, saying -- the Marine Corps is 'included' in the Navy.

    Best advice I can give is avoid any patterns in your life style, have your land line telephone disconnected, change your cell phone, take different routes in all your travels...

  4. #4
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    717

    Default Please, Please Forgive Me!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
    Aside from the arch heresy of suggesting that Airborne forces should belong to the Air force, you have compounded the felony by suggesting -- nay, saying -- the Marine Corps is 'included' in the Navy.

    Best advice I can give is avoid any patterns in your life style, have your land line telephone disconnected, change your cell phone, take different routes in all your travels...
    I was under the influence; I didn't know what I was saying; These were statements made under duress; Please spare my life, I have so much to live for...!

    As for the Marines, I meant that in terms that they are part of the Department of the Navy, not the US Navy proper; and if I may beg your pardon for continuing down this same path with regard to the Air Force and the Airborne, I would suggest (purely hypothetically of course, I'm thinking of Kurt Student and the Luftwaffe Paras here...) the same sort of relationship between the Department of the Air Force and the Airborne; there is no way even a leg like me would ever let the flyboys get their nice, soft, clean, pink hands on the tactical and day-to-day affairs of the Infantry (no 1st Allied Airborne Armies led by flyboys on my watch).

    Returning to the matter at hand Ken...Please, PLEASE pardon me and spare my life... I am suffused with the inherent stupidity, arrogance, and inexperience that accompanies youth...I require the wisdom, correction, and firm guidance of my elders...Save me Obi Wan...!

  5. #5
    Council Member Culpeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Roswell, USA
    Posts
    540

    Default

    I just realized we went from discussing "airmen" as the title of the thread to the Air Force as a whole.
    "But suppose everybody on our side felt that way?"
    "Then I'd certainly be a damned fool to feel any other way. Wouldn't I?"


  6. #6
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Not me you have to worry about,

    Quote Originally Posted by Norfolk View Post
    I was under the influence; I didn't know what I was saying; These were statements made under duress; Please spare my life, I have so much to live for...!
    . . .

    Returning to the matter at hand Ken...Please, PLEASE pardon me and spare my life... I am suffused with the inherent stupidity, arrogance, and inexperience that accompanies youth...I require the wisdom, correction, and firm guidance of my elders...Save me Obi Wan...!
    I am indeed ancient, am long retarded and am almost excessively forgiving of youthful indiscretion such as thine. I long ago stopped trying to impart wisdom to anyone who does not seriously ask for such assistance -- even then, I'm rather careful; people tend to get dicey if your assistance is helpful because you knew something they didn't and if the assist wasn't helpful, they're even more irked. So, I'm not Obi and you're on your own.

    You also missed in suggesting I care, you really need to worry about those younger than yourself -- they're the ones who take that stuff really seriously...

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

    Default I've got that part covered...I hope.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
    I am indeed ancient, am long retarded and am almost excessively forgiving of youthful indiscretion such as thine. I long ago stopped trying to impart wisdom to anyone who does not seriously ask for such assistance -- even then, I'm rather careful; people tend to get dicey if your assistance is helpful because you knew something they didn't and if the assist wasn't helpful, they're even more irked. So, I'm not Obi and you're on your own.

    You also missed in suggesting I care, you really need to worry about those younger than yourself -- they're the ones who take that stuff really seriously...
    I'm not so worried about some of them, if they're as young and dumb as me, it's the old and wise that scare me most. A GPMG and a Carl G laid on the driveway, some Claymores and Elsies out back (huh, Elsie mines are banned now - oops,) and a surprise inside waiting for those who make it to my door (two actually, I'll be hunkered down in the back of the beer store across the street when they arrive), and I just might get out of this alive...maybe.

    Even if they do get to me, I'll still go down as the man who actually got the Air Force guys and the Airborne to come together and agree on something tactical. How often have you heard "Death From Above" and "Airborne!" shouted at the same time - in unison.
    Last edited by Norfolk; 10-08-2007 at 10:15 PM.

  8. #8
    Council Member Culpeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Roswell, USA
    Posts
    540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Norfolk View Post
    I'm not so worried about some of them, if they're as young and dumb as me, it's the old and wise that scare me most. A GPMG and a Carl G laid on the driveway, some Claymores and Elsies out back (huh, Elsie mines are banned now - oops,) and a surprise inside waiting for those who make it to my door (two actually, I'll be hunkered down in the back of the beer store across the street when they arrive), and I just might get out of this alive...maybe.

    Even if they do get to me, I'll still go down as the man who actually got the Air Force guys and the Airborne to come together and agree on something tactical. How often have you heard "Death From Above" and "Airborne!" shouted at the same time - in unison.

    Uh, I'm really getting confused now with this pairing Airborne with USAF. In the late 70s and early 80s I served in the Air Force as a ROMAD. I went to Airborne training at Ft. Benning. My sister squadron was actually stationed at Pope AFB. I guess you can state my squadron was the second string. What I'm getting at is that all the planes I jumped out of were USAF and I was USAF so I don't know what you mean by joining the Airborne with the USAF. Also, PJ and Combat Controllers also go through Airborne training at Ft. Benning as well. The two airmen I went through jump school with went on and completed Air Assault school at Ft. Campbell as well. I think some of you guys have a distorted view on the Air Force. Like how many PJs have become chief of staffs. That is irrelevant. PJs are enlisted personnel. And I'm not just talking about enlisted USAF guys either. Take for example, the C123 that took down a Soviet helicopter by throwing large chains out of the back ramp at night over Loas. Some of you need to get out of the 1940s. The title of the thread refers to understanding airmen. Airmen in USAF company language are enlisted personnel. You are never going to get the 82nd Airborne Division to become a USAF Combat Wing if that is what you are driving at. so, I have heard "Death From Above" and "Airborne" in unison. They are both 82nd and 101st Airborne bravado. I think you're getting confused with "Death on Call". That is a CAS bravado.
    Last edited by Culpeper; 10-08-2007 at 11:35 PM.
    "But suppose everybody on our side felt that way?"
    "Then I'd certainly be a damned fool to feel any other way. Wouldn't I?"


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
  •