Saturday, February 20, 2010
The Proper (And Smart ) Use Of Air Power
From New Wars:
I often insist that because airpower today is so effective, you can do more with less. Nothing is more glaring proof of this fact as a mere 4 Royal Air Force Typhoon fighters are currently guarding the British Overseas Territory of the Falkland Islands. While the Navy would certainly be on call in force should the unthinkable happen, invasion from the Argentine mainland, the Mount Pleasant Airport, constructed soon after the 1982 Conflict would be the key to the island’s defenses.
Read more ....
My Comment: I closely followed the news when the Falklands War broke out, and at the time there was a considerable amount of commentary in both the UK and US press that if the RAF had positioned a few planes and an airfield coupled with the proper radar detection and early warning stations .... the Argentinians would never have invaded.
30 years later .... that lesson appears to have been learned (to a certain degree).
On a side note .... I will always remember asking my father (a man who witnessed more war than anyone that I know) on who did he think was going to be the eventual winner in the Falklands war. At the time the British were just assembling their fleet, and the Argentinians were busily positioning thousands of troops and equipment onto the island to repulse the impending British onslaught.
His answer was blunt .... the British were going to destroy the Argentine military. I must admit that this did not make sense to me, the US/Canadian press were not optimistic that the British were going to be successful, and the Argentinians with their Latin American allies were boasting that the British were going to lose.
Pressing further, I asked him on how sure he was, and why. His answer was simple. The British have been fighting wars for centuries .... they know what war is all about, they know how to fight it, and more importantly .... they know how to defeat the enemy. On the other hand the Argentine military know only one thing .... how to stage a coup d'etat and how to terrorize their own civilian population. The last thing that they know is how to fight a war.
30 years later I am a much older and wiser man .... and (sadly) it is only now that I can appreciate how brilliant my father was when it came to understanding warfare.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I think your father was talking about a different breed of British warrior and politician. Remember during the Falklands war they had Margret Thatcher...do you think Gordon Brown is her equal?
The UK's Navy was fully staffed and wasn't fighting for its very survival...The Army wasn't bogged down in Afghanistan.
I'm sorry but I vigorously disagree with your assessment. Typhoons are a token gesture in the end. If an invasion is properly planned there is no way air power could stop it. Especially if those airplanes are targeted from the outset.
Thank you Solomon for your comment.
I agree with your comments .... but I think I should have also made myself more clearer (English is not my first language .... sorry).
The present UK military presence is an upgrade from 1982, but it can still be overwhelmed if the Argentine Government and military adopt the proper strategy (if they want to invade).
But I am not looking at this through the prism of a military point of view .... I am looking at it through a political point of view. Every incremental increase in military strength results in an exponential increase in political risk.
At the moment, the political risk for Argentina to attack the Falklands is unacceptably high .... their focus is in the political arena. But if the Falklands only had a small detachment of troops .... say 20 or 30 men, instead of an airfield, one UK naval warship in the area, a large detachment of troops, etc. Hmmmmm .... the political risks for Argentina then becomes interesting.
To Solomon .... I almost forgot .... yes, Gordon Brown is definitely no Margaret Thatcher .... not even close.
But the British warrior, his knowledge and experience, the spirit .... it is still there. The problem is in Whitehall.
Oh ok. Then we're on the same page. I agree with all three of your statements ---re. Gordon Brown, the political risk involved with an invasion and on the fighting spirit of the British soldier.
I tend to have a narrow focus on these type issues. Ignoring the politics of military actions have probably caused more problems than the actual action itself. Great post.
War News, thanks for sharing the story of your father and I am a little jealous, because at the time I had no one to share my passion for naval affairs back then. Now I wouldn't either if not for the internet!
I recall having a new copy of Weyers Warships of the World and follwing news of every vessel on both sides, having the specs right in front of me. I saved newspaper clippings and studied all the magazing articles at the high school I attended.
Just amazing to me who already had a love for all things military especially the Navy, to witness the first real sea war in decades! Most everything I write concerning nautical matters revolves around this brief and totally out of the blue conflict from the 80s.
Amazing News..
Term Papers
Post a Comment