Originally Posted by
SoPinesHeel
Had airplanes existed at the time of the constitution's inception, you better believe the founders would have seen the importance of an independent air force...They were forward thinkers who were ahead of the curve on most things. The Army and Navy have not historically been very willing to change and did not foresee the force air power has become. There are many in those services who still do not. Why do you think the Europeans were so quick to create independent air services in World War I? A lesson it took us 50 years to learn and still you have people on an Airplane-centric message board saying the Air Force is not needed...that is amazing to me.
SPH,
I think I see where you are going with the USAF is "air power" posts. I understand and agree but have some questions. You have mixed several issues to make a point. This could be a war college subject but I will try and be brief.
One, we need an AF. The USN/USMC do not have enough strike/fighter assets to cover a large land mass. Army only has rotary CAS. This doesn't even speak of tankers or air transport.
Two, the Navy learned from Billy Mitchell (sp?) the hard way. Yes, it served the 1940's AF well to become independent but that is old news.
Three, air power is not a "strategic" mission, this includes Naval Air. Air power should exist to support the "real estate" transaction of full scale war. Small scale conflict is different. I am making a distinction between "power projection" and all out combat.
Four, the independence of the services is good for future planning but bad for interoperability. Each service can fight for it's budget to meet it's requirements but that should stop at the operational level.
Five, the Constitution says nothing regarding the independence but only to maintain a Navy and militia (summary not quote).
Questions:
Should the AF be in support role all the time?
If no to above, should the Navy have tankers? (I'm talking big iron, KC-135 or better)
Should a Unified Commander always be Army or USMC, i.e. a ground type? An exception is the Pacific, the Navy's bath tub, always an Admiral.
Should the USMC have a vote on the JCS? (I say yes)
As before all good stuff. I don't want to poke anybody in the eye but do like the discussion even if we agree to disagree or just like shooting the bull.
Fly safe,
SC