Air supremacy is not necessary to win a war.

[The SC]

Sure battles and wars can be won without air power, prior to the 20th century this was how combat was done, but in the modern time if a nation has air assets it is wise to use them, even if they aren't dropping ordinance.

That is obvious since the introduction of aerial warfare in WW1. Most nations today if not all try to have this 3rd dimension, maybe the most important dimension in today's warfare. But what Iraq could do?, it was attacked by ISIS before any potent airplane showed up, and afterward it was kind of too little too late.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

That is obvious since the introduction of aerial warfare in WW1. Most nations today if not all try to have this 3rd dimension, maybe the most important dimension in today's warfare. But what Iraq could do?, it was attacked by ISIS before any potent airplane showed up, and afterward it was kind of too little too late.

There are more than three dimensions to a battlefield. Air, sea and land are the most commonly thought of, followed by space and cyber, but these are not alone. Economic warfare such as sanctions can cripple an enemy before a fight, political warfare can lessen an opponent's will to sustain a fight. Just look at the US political situation during Vietnam. Iraq, not being inclusive to all people and with a government that played favorites lost the political battlefield and bred the conditions for a return of AQI... the original name of ISIS and the same jerks we fought in Iraq in 2003. Iraq had options, it just didn't realize this until it was too late.

 

[C130]

Sure battles and wars can be won without air power, prior to the 20th century this was how combat was done, but in the modern time if a nation has air assets it is wise to use them, even if they aren't dropping ordinance.

oh how easy it would be just to drop a nuke on our enemies or just fire bomb them to death. that's the power of controlling the air.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

oh how easy it would be just to drop a nuke on our enemies or just fire bomb them to death. that's the power of controlling the air.

No fight ever continues after the fighters are smoldering glass

 

[The SC]

There are more than three dimensions to a battlefield. Air, sea and land are the most commonly thought of, followed by space and cyber, but these are not alone. Economic warfare such as sanctions can cripple an enemy before a fight, political warfare can lessen an opponent's will to sustain a fight. Just look at the US political situation during Vietnam. Iraq, not being inclusive to all people and with a government that played favorites lost the political battlefield and bred the conditions for a return of AQI... the original name of ISIS and the same jerks we fought in Iraq in 2003. Iraq had options, it just didn't realize this until it was too late.

Was talking about battlefield, it true that there are other dimensions to warfare before and after or without even engaging on a battlefield, but if it comes to that, we will be restrained to the 3 dimension for a decisive outcome.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

Was talking about battlefield, it true that there are other dimensions to warfare before and after or without even engaging on a battlefield, but if it comes to that, we will be restrained to the 3 dimension for a decisive outcome.

But the three dimensions of combat didn't factor into the end of the Vietnam war. It was politics that ended that conflict and politics that likely never saw a campaign in Iran either. Wars are fought, but not always won on the battlefield. Bombs and bullets are an important piece, but the puzzle is much larger.

 

[The SC]

But the three dimensions of combat didn't factor into the end of the Vietnam war. It was politics that ended that conflict and politics that likely never saw a campaign in Iran either. Wars are fought, but not always won on the battlefield. Bombs and bullets are an important piece, but the puzzle is much larger.

Of course, and I agree with you. We know that war is but an extension of policies to come back to political decisions, that are decided on the battlefield rather than around a negotiating table. It all depend on what position of power you are at...

 

[Thorough Pro]

a war is between two countries with identified enemy, targets, etc. what you are referring to are insurgencies.

It has been long said that no country has won a war without a superior air-force in the last 100 years.
Let me bring up two recent contra-examples:
1. ISIS had no air force but captured a huge chunk of land despite Iraqi and allies air force.
2. Houthi in Yemen captured the country with no air force, despite better Yemeni air force.

there are more examples, of course.

@500
@gambit