But, according to Farley, Goldwater-Nichols failed to solve the dual problems of procurement and training. By law, the services have their own budgets for acquiring weapons and recruiting and training personnel.
The separation of the Army and Air Force happened before my time in the military. However, it was always a matter of discussion. The Army, my service, was interested in air power as "fire support". In other words, the operation receives timely and targeted air support to advance any particular operation ongoing at that time. That is a good argument for having left the two services as one, but I think the answer touched on in this article is better.
Inter-operability is one thing, but interoperability is really about unity of effort.
There is a huge argument to be made for unity so that we truly train as we fight.
A combined service did not hurt WWII at all. They managed in less than 4 years what we've not been able to accomplish yet in Afghanistan.
Absolutely! Sign Me Up!
Forget the Trial … Make Me a Member!
Already a Member? Login Now
Get your risk-free, 30-Day FREE Trial Membership right now.
You left the commercial in the text. I thought I had a stroke for minute. Whoa!
I disagree. The lessons of World War II, which many are forgetting, demonstrate precisely why an independent Air Force is essential to this country’s defense. Talk of folding it back into the Army is just stupid.
Inter-service rivalry has been wasteful and counter-productive.
For the past year or so, it appears that the long knives are out for the Air Force Scalps.
Rebuttal to Mr. Farley ... http://breakingdefense.com/2013/08/why-america-needs-the-air-force-rebuttal-to-prof-farley/
The Navy has more planes than the Air Force, the Army has more small craft than the Navy, and the Navy has the better ground combat unit that either the Marines or the Army.
So yeah, who needs the Air Force?
I’m no expert on the matter. So, for what it is worth.... I believe Vietnam is the worst example of the effects of separate forces. But I also believe Iraq to be the best example of the effects of separate forces. I think technology has a lot to do with it. Note that the Army, Navy and Marines all run their own fixed wing (and helicopter) units in support of their mission.
Most importantly, leadership is the key to any military success. And out POTUS has put all the best and brightest out to pasture to protect us from our warriors.
I do like the idea of giving the A-10 to the Army instead of retiring the A-10.
Ah, getting back to the US Army Air Force. Nah, we got rid of them in 1947, let them stay separate.
Stopped reading right there.
All A-10s to the Army!
Back in the late 50s or early 60s, an AF 4-star (wish I could remember his name) was asked if the U.S. would ever have a unified military, like Canada does. His reply was, “Yes, it will be called the U.S. Navy.”
For any organization, consider its core purpose.
Army is to occupy ground (with our people).
Air Force is to vacate ground (of any people).
Big difference.
I think having separate services is a good idea but I also think that combining the civilian departments (Department of the Army and Department of the Air Force) into a single department might help (similar to the Dept. of the Navy covering both the Navy and the USMC). So we would be left with a Department of Defense and two subordinate departments - the Department of the Navy and the Department of the Army and Air Force. (I also think this might save money.)
The guy is plainly an idiot who doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Whoever controls the high ground controls the engagement. The first thing we’ve done in every war since WWII is establish air superiority.
SO if an airliner is hi-jacked and loaded with say, a bomb and sent back into US airspace, we’re gonna....What? Retrofit an Airbus (like an episode of The A Team) and send it up? Dogfighting Dreamliners?
Good Lord, just abolish the military service with the highest intelligence standards, and have all the fighter pilots sitting around comparing their dates of rank?
NO!
The USAF is arguably the only airforce in the world with a genuinely independent strategic warfare capability in the form of a large fleet of capable heavy bombers. Pretty much every other airforce in the world is basically limited to providing a striking/air-defence/logistical support package for the other two services, and could really be folded into the more senior services.