There's more than enough parochialism to go around, IMO. And don't get me started about the "no air attack on US ground forces" straw man....

The Air Force has, IMO, been fortunate in that it has been able to more or less pick and choose its wars since Vietnam (where, as Dunlap fails to mention, they learned slowly and quickly forgot much of what they learned once the shooting stopped...until the TAC generals gained ascendancy in the 1980s and later). Their op tempo overall has been lower (with the notable exception of certain airframes and communities...tankers, AWACs, and A-10s spring immediately to mind, but there are others that were constantly drawn on as well), which gives them more time to consider the ideal conflict and develop systems for that conflict.

This is an area where we may have to agree to disagree, Ken. I found it most useful as an institutional expression of what the Air Force believes it is, where it's been, and where it's going.