Originally Posted by Tom Odom
McPeak's next project was the "Delta Airlines" USAF uniform
Best
Tom
I worked for the Air Force during THAT firestorm so I was mentally prepared for the Shinseki/beret brouhaha.
Out of the Closet
Traitor
I bet you have an autographed pic of GEN McPeak at home and...
Your 'jammies' probably have F22s on them
Tom
PS
A HA! The twuth emerges!I worked for the Air Force during THAT firestorm so I was mentally prepared for the Shinseki/beret brouhaha.
Last edited by Tom Odom; 12-07-2007 at 03:43 PM.
Please tell me I didn't really read this. Someone pass the bleach for the mind's eye.
Back on topic-
I really liked the observation comparing AF history to Stalinist history, that hit the ten ring...
MG Dunlap's article- He still operates from an unspoken assumption of symmetry, that there are infrastructures, hard and virtual, and other basically conventional targets. He believes in technology driven processes for what is an innately human and personal endeavor.
In COIN, airpower is the big firebase at altitude, it is ISR, and it is logisitical support. In support of COIN, it can also assist with isolating the area of operation from the bad guys' sanctuaries. Read the article carefully, MG Dunlap fails to identify anything new on these points. Regarding cyber and psyops, he basically says that somehow being in blue gives Airmen a different perspective on these disciplines than anyone else in DoD. Not convincing, when you look at the capabilities in DoD but outside the Air Force.
The article completely ignores a fundamental truth about COIN; that the center of successful COIN ends up with people meeting face-to-face and developing relationships as a foundation for future improvements.
Frankly, the article is little more than air force cheerleading and shouldn't be brought into a serious discussion of COIN much less the broader catagory of Small Wars. (Except to support Steve's CV)
Don't get me wrong; airpower is an essential edge over our opponents, but this guy sounds like he's channeling GEN McPeak.
Norfolk, you forgot Steve Blair a Marine who teaches Air Force ROTC cadets.
I am gonna tell you a story. At the SMART wars workshop I went to during a discussion about what to call the present situation going on(LWOT,GWOT, Global Insurgency,Etc.) in the world an Air Force Col. asked me why the Army dosen't call it Small Unit Wars instead of all the other names.
They also had list of Great Air Power Commanders...You know who made the list General Mathew Ridgeway former commander of the 82nd Airborne.
Last edited by slapout9; 12-08-2007 at 04:03 AM. Reason: add stuff
Hi Norfolk, Ridgeway made the list because Airborne Ops can be done fast and in parallel, they can attack multiple targets at the same time. One of the tenants of EBO. A lot of Airborne warfare theory is very similar to EBO hence my interest in it. Billy Mitchell was the first to point this out and he has never received the credit he deserved for starting the ball rolling in this area.
Part of that (IMO) has to deal with the AF's own attitude toward Mitchell. He's only recently come back into vogue, and even then it's something of a watered-down version that ignores some of his earlier stuff. Chennault comes in for the same treatment in many instances.
"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
Sorry for getting in late in the game, but this is a good analogy for something that continually bothers me:
In the 25 years now of attending Army Schools, sooner or later we discuss Military Leadership Traits, and unless I've brought it up, this Leadership Trait is never mentioned. And when I do, people tend to look at me like I have two heads.
I want some (not all) military leaders who are sociopathic mass-killers. Just In Case. For those slick boys who brought you "Warrior Ethic" as a buzz-word; excuse me, I don't think they really, really want more Frank Lukes, Chuck Yeagers, Pattons, or to an even worse (or better) example, Harmons. And if they like to kill bad enough, they'll behave within the Law of War, so that they can keep doing it.
And speaking as an outsider, I'm going to say:
No. No, you do not. Because all wars end, and you then have to ask yourself "What the hell do I do with these people are sociopathic mass-killers?"
If your soldier or officer archetype cannot fit in society after being demobilized...I'm not sure I want them, really. I really am not.
Otherwise we risk winning the war, only to wind up with our method of fighting said war causing even bigger problems.
Not in MY Army. Out of box fighters and thinkers, good to have around. Sociopaths and mass killers, absolutely not! I can't believe you would suggest that. Those types always lead to more trouble.
Mass killing is not a capability that we need to have in our kit bag in the contemporary era.
Your examples - Yeager, Patton, etc... were all smart, daring men and great fighters, but not sociopaths. Men like Yeager (one of my favorite autobiographies) were daring, out of the box kind of guys who occasionally gave the institution a well deserved middle finger. I'm pretty sure that's the personality you meant - but your comment scares the hell out of me.
Last edited by Cavguy; 12-11-2007 at 04:35 PM.
To accuse Patton of being a sociopath is to buy totally into the mythic Patton created by Bradley and others who didn't like GSP much at all. Patton was actually a very complicated man, and one hell of a commander in the bargain.
"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
Controlled sociopaths who are not mass killers
work; mass killers and uncontrolled sociopaths are indeed dangerous.
A degree of sociopathic tendency is helpful in avoiding psychological melt down to the carnage that occurs in war. What one sees in Iraq in a year can occur in a week in major combat operations; anyone can deal with it, the minor sociopaths just deal with it a little more easily and keep on trucking.
And there are a lot of us out here...
Amongst other things, Patton was dyslexic, and a classic dual personality as well, not unlike Sherman. But he was no sociopath.SteveBlair: To accuse Patton of being a sociopath is to buy totally into the mythic Patton created by []others who didn't like GSP much at all. Patton was actually a very complicated man[]
Last edited by Norfolk; 12-12-2007 at 02:27 PM. Reason: Appropriateness.
Patton was dyslexic?
...How the hell did he survive in the army, let alone in command?
Read D'Este's biography of him sometime. An interesting story, though some in the Patton family still dispute the dyslexia point.
"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
Posting Permissions
"A Sherman can give you a very nice... edge."- Oddball,
Bookmarks