Roger Spiller outlined six propositions in his essay, “War Termination: Theory and American Practice." and this paper will select two of those propositions and two airpower capabilities per proposition to explain how they can contribute to ensuring war termination in accordance with national interests.
The first proposition I selected is: “In every war, the aims of all sides, no matter how opposed at the beginning, gradually converge toward an agreement to stop fighting.” This proposition is stating that war is not an end to itself and the goal of, at least most, people is to not make war. Spiller states that “Historically, if one were to ask a soldier what he or she expected to accomplish in a war, victory was the automatic reply.”. America’s …show more content…
F22s, Surface to Air Missiles, and advanced Radar will allow us to maintain Global Reach and Precision strike. Without enabling this freedom, every resource spent maintaining the skies is diverted to from supporting the ground. Dominating the air lets us to set the tempo and choose our strategic effects. However, it will become tempting for leadership use this capability solve symptoms instead of holistic solutions. In the summer of 1964, Kennedy and the CJCS were trying to leverage enough force for their political actions without bringing the Chinese into war (XXX). The end result was casualties on our side and a longer war because the military wasn’t being used doctrinally with airpower. It wouldn’t be until Linebacker II that real strategic effects would be dealt to bring the Vietnamese to the table (XXX), enabling both propositions listed in this paper.
In conclusion, airpower has demonstrated that it has the capability to shape the end of conflicts along the two principles that: everyone wants to stop fighting eventually and that war must be fought on more than the battlefield. In addition to fighting these proven capabilities, the warfighter directly contributes to the end of conflict along national
The first proposition I selected is: “In every war, the aims of all sides, no matter how opposed at the beginning, gradually converge toward an agreement to stop fighting.” This proposition is stating that war is not an end to itself and the goal of, at least most, people is to not make war. Spiller states that “Historically, if one were to ask a soldier what he or she expected to accomplish in a war, victory was the automatic reply.”. America’s …show more content…
F22s, Surface to Air Missiles, and advanced Radar will allow us to maintain Global Reach and Precision strike. Without enabling this freedom, every resource spent maintaining the skies is diverted to from supporting the ground. Dominating the air lets us to set the tempo and choose our strategic effects. However, it will become tempting for leadership use this capability solve symptoms instead of holistic solutions. In the summer of 1964, Kennedy and the CJCS were trying to leverage enough force for their political actions without bringing the Chinese into war (XXX). The end result was casualties on our side and a longer war because the military wasn’t being used doctrinally with airpower. It wouldn’t be until Linebacker II that real strategic effects would be dealt to bring the Vietnamese to the table (XXX), enabling both propositions listed in this paper.
In conclusion, airpower has demonstrated that it has the capability to shape the end of conflicts along the two principles that: everyone wants to stop fighting eventually and that war must be fought on more than the battlefield. In addition to fighting these proven capabilities, the warfighter directly contributes to the end of conflict along national