Air power rulz!

[Shek]

This should get some discussion going

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/09/2009013

[Canmoore]

Did vietnam not prove that you cant win a war with air-power alone?

[troung]

Think Dien Bien Phu.

A failure of airpower.

It was primarily air power, not land power, that kept the Soviets at bay while the U.S. won the Cold War. And it was not just the bomber force and the missileers; it was the airlifters, as well. There are few strategic victories in the annals of military history more complete and at so low a human cost as that won by American pilots during the Berlin airlift. Armageddon was avoided.

SSBNs....

Yet, if America maintains its aeronautical superiority, the enemy will not be able to kill 2,200 U.S. aviators and wound another 15,000, as the ragtag Iraqi terrorists have managed to do to our land forces.

....

And, of course, bombs will go awry. Allegations will be made (as they are currently against the Israelis) of targeting civilians and so forth. But the nature of the air weapon is such that an Abu Ghraib or Hadithah simply cannot occur

Dirty underwear versus a knocked down building full of women and childern...

So what explains the rapid collapse of the Taliban and al-Qaida in 2001?

Massive bribes? Cut off of money to the Taliban? The Taliban's friends loosing their number? The Northern Alliance going on the attack? The fact no one liked the Taliban? The poor morale in the Taliban? The loss of advisors from the PA?

I am close? Is it a combination of the above mixed with American support to the Northern Alliance in the way of airpower and G-FACs?

Modern air power.

And totally on its own no less...

More specifically, the marriage of precision weapons with precise targeting by tiny numbers of Special Forces troops on the ground. The results were stunning. Putatively invulnerable positions the Taliban had occupied for years literally disappeared in a rain of satellite-directed bombs from B-1s and B-52s flying so high they could be neither seen nor heard.

So the thousands of NA men backed by tanks, IFVs, artillery, rockets and so forth had nothing to do with it? Lazy bastards. And to think they were a far more heavily armed combat force then the Hmong who despite the largest bombing in history couldn't hold back the NVA.

It was the USAF/SF/USN supporting a NA ground offensive against the Taliban.

In other words, the Taliban and al-Qaida were just as tough as the mujahideen who fought the Russians, and more than willing to confront U.S. ground forces, but were broken by the hopelessness that American-style air power inflicted upon them.

But the war isn't over. Thier leadership escaped.

When war does happen, it is especially important for U.S. land forces to have confidence in the skies above them, as it has been more than half a century since any soldier or Marine suffered an enemy air attack.

America never did get to do WW3 with the USSR where I am sure at least one rocket would have hit some soldier or marine. Of yeah and in the Domican Republic a F-51D did to an air strike. And one VPAF did hit a USN ship.

Unexplained is the fact that, despite the awesome personal valor and energy of the troops, U.S. land forces have yet to begin to dominate their domain the way American air power does its domain. Air power is not only America's most flexible military capability, it is also the best hope to present a truly show-stopping impediment to the nefarious schemes of her enemies

Since the 1920s airpower has been always going to win a war on its own. Never seems to happen that way but then the city of Gold is always over the next hill... my grand kids will read similar articles I assume...

[-{SpoonmaN}-]

LOL you managed to say every single thing I was going to say. Thanks for saving me some time.

[Guest]

American air power can rapidly educate cultured and sophisticated societies about the costs of war and the futility of pursuing it. This is much the reason why air power alone delivered victory in Operation Allied Force in Kosovo in 1999, without the need to put a single U.S. soldier at risk on the ground.

You mean the "war" were the "awesome" power of the NATO air forces bombed Kosovo and Serbia for 11 weeks and destroyed a total of around 50 confirmed AFVs?

Could someone be any more ignorant of history?

[-{SpoonmaN}-]

You mean the "war" were the "awesome" power of the NATO air forces bombed Kosovo and Serbia for 11 weeks and destroyed a total of around 50 confirmed AFVs?

Could someone be any more ignorant of history?

I dunno those dummies with telephone poles for guns would be sorely missed in the Serbian Army I'm sure. When you think about it, they were probably as much of a threat to NATO armour as anything else the Serbs were fielding.

[Guest]

I dunno those dummies with telephone poles for guns would be sorely missed in the Serbian Army I'm sure. When you think about it, they were probably as much of a threat to NATO armour as anything else the Serbs were fielding.

They did get one F-117 though.

[gunnut]

Saddam didn't run from our bombs. He ran from our tanks.

An airforce pilot in his mighty F-15 didn't grab Saddam. A grunt yanked that bastard out of a rat hole with his bare hands.

Air power can do a lot. But you still need boots to hold the ground.

[B.Smitty]

You mean the "war" were the "awesome" power of the NATO air forces bombed Kosovo and Serbia for 11 weeks and destroyed a total of around 50 confirmed AFVs?

Could someone be any more ignorant of history?

Airpower did acheive the strategic goal of Serbian capitulation in this case, without boots on the ground.

I'd call that a victory.

[-{SpoonmaN}-]

They did get one F-117 though.

So I keep hearing. When someone shoots down two, then I'll be impressed.

[Guest]

Airpower did acheive the strategic goal of Serbian capitulation in this case, without boots on the ground.

I'd call that a victory.

The Serbian withdrawal was more for political reasons than military ones. The fact is airpower has has never won a war in of itself. Yes, it plays a vital role in modern war, but this "we'll bomb everything and never need ground troops" rubbish is totally moronic.

[Guest]

Here's another article:

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/interna...26.2press.html

[B.Smitty]

The Serbian withdrawal was more for political reasons than military ones. The fact is airpower has has never won a war in of itself. Yes, it plays a vital role in modern war, but this "we'll bomb everything and never need ground troops" rubbish is totally moronic.

Hmm, the things I've read indicate it was the increasing destruction caused by airpower that convinced the Serbian leadership to withdraw.

But if you call that a political reason, then I guess I agree. ;)

[Officer of Engineers]

Actually, the knocking out the power station for the 1st time scared Milosevic. The Russian delegation then convinced him that NATO will only escalate, including a gound war. He only surrendered under a Russian promise of Serbian retention of Kosovo if only in name. Anyone else noticed the timing of the Russian motorized company in Pristina?

The 3JA was pissed off at the surrender.

[Repatriated Canuck]

What is 3JA?

Belgrade got smashed good and they haven't even gotten around to tearing them down. I saw their military headquarters, I nice big bomb cracked it down the middle. Who says precision airstrikes are not precision has his head in his rectum.