RE: Historians downgrade Battle of Britain
Posted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 5:47 pm
I read an interesting book a while back about air power in vietnam about the Linebacker Raids. Can't rember the title sorry but again, they thought that air power alone would "force" a solution. Massive bomb loads, improved aiming, almost total air control, fewer targets to destroy and it still didn't work.
It does seem that air power rarely achieves the "forcing" of a result - it only facilitates other military activities. The NATO bombing in Yugoslavia might be a rare result where bombing alone achieved the solution?
Found this on Amazon which looked interesting...
http://www.amazon.com/Bombing-Win-Coerc ... F8&s=books
Highlight from the page:
"1. Punishment strategies will rarely succeed....
"2. Risk strategies will fail....
"3. Denial strategies work best....
"4. Surrender of homeland territory is especially unlikely....
"5. Surrender terms that incorporate heavy ad! ditional punishment will not be accepted....
"6. Coercive success almost always takes longer than the logic of either punishment or denial alone would suggest."
It does seem that air power rarely achieves the "forcing" of a result - it only facilitates other military activities. The NATO bombing in Yugoslavia might be a rare result where bombing alone achieved the solution?
Found this on Amazon which looked interesting...
http://www.amazon.com/Bombing-Win-Coerc ... F8&s=books
Highlight from the page:
"1. Punishment strategies will rarely succeed....
"2. Risk strategies will fail....
"3. Denial strategies work best....
"4. Surrender of homeland territory is especially unlikely....
"5. Surrender terms that incorporate heavy ad! ditional punishment will not be accepted....
"6. Coercive success almost always takes longer than the logic of either punishment or denial alone would suggest."