Comment Flawed Analysis (Score 2, Insightful) 753
Despite the claims of JonKatz, the ongoing conflict in Afghanistan does not disprove the need for infantry. We might not have many ground troops in, but the Northern Alliance has a whole bunch.
What the current conflict does seem to reinforce is that air power vastly increases the effectiveness of infantry. An outnumbered, disorganized force of partisans (the Northern Alliance), was able to establish territorial dominance in a matter of weeks over a mountainous country the size of Texas.
The latter half of the 20th century has demonstrated again and again that air power cannot control territory. The US was unable to drive the Iraqi army out of Kuwait by applied air power - ground forces were required. Air power alone was not sufficient to stop the deployment of troops in the Yugoslav quagmire. The vast Allied bombing runs in Germany during WWII did not significantly affect production - Krupp produced a continually increasing amount of material throughout the war.
Nor does air power do much to break civilian support for the government in power. Iraq is the first counter-example that comes to mind. In Yugoslavia, support for Milosovich actually increased during the course of the campaign. London, Japan and Germany during WWII are also fine examples - with the exception of Fat Man and Little Boy.
The poor bloody infantry isn't going anywhere. It's all very well and good to speculate on drone warfare - but all we have right now is a limited example of a small number of "drones" being used against a technologically disadvantaged opponent.
- Ed Pichon
What the current conflict does seem to reinforce is that air power vastly increases the effectiveness of infantry. An outnumbered, disorganized force of partisans (the Northern Alliance), was able to establish territorial dominance in a matter of weeks over a mountainous country the size of Texas.
The latter half of the 20th century has demonstrated again and again that air power cannot control territory. The US was unable to drive the Iraqi army out of Kuwait by applied air power - ground forces were required. Air power alone was not sufficient to stop the deployment of troops in the Yugoslav quagmire. The vast Allied bombing runs in Germany during WWII did not significantly affect production - Krupp produced a continually increasing amount of material throughout the war.
Nor does air power do much to break civilian support for the government in power. Iraq is the first counter-example that comes to mind. In Yugoslavia, support for Milosovich actually increased during the course of the campaign. London, Japan and Germany during WWII are also fine examples - with the exception of Fat Man and Little Boy.
The poor bloody infantry isn't going anywhere. It's all very well and good to speculate on drone warfare - but all we have right now is a limited example of a small number of "drones" being used against a technologically disadvantaged opponent.
- Ed Pichon
