Bombing to Win: Air Power and Coercion in War by Robert A. Pape

By Robert A. Pape

From Iraq to Bosnia to North Korea, the 1st query in American overseas coverage debates is more and more: Can air energy by myself do the task? Robert A. Pape offers a scientific solution. reading the result of over thirty air campaigns, together with a close reconstruction of the Gulf battle, he argues that the most important to good fortune is attacking the enemy's army process, now not its economic climate, humans, or leaders. Coercive air strength can be triumphant, yet no longer as cost effectively as air fanatics want to believe.

Pape examines the air raids on Germany, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq in addition to these of Israel as opposed to Egypt, supplying info of bombing and governmental choice making. His designated narratives of the strategic effectiveness of bombing diversity from the classical situations of global battle II to a rare reconstruction of airpower use within the Gulf warfare, according to lately declassified files. during this now-classic paintings of the speculation and perform of airpower and its political results, Robert A. Pape is helping army strategists and coverage makers pass judgement on the aim of assorted air thoughts, and is helping common readers comprehend the coverage debates.

Show description

Read Online or Download Bombing to Win: Air Power and Coercion in War PDF

Similar military sciences books

Historical Dictionary of the U.S. Army

Having advanced during the last and 1 / 4 centuries to develop into the most efficient army strength on this planet, the U. S. military has a historical past wealthy in heritage and culture. This old dictionary presents brief, transparent, authoritative entries on a extensive pass part of army phrases, options, hands and gear, devices and agencies, campaigns and battles, and those who have had an important influence on military.

Coercing Compliance: State-Initiated Brute Force in Today’s World

Few worldwide safety concerns stimulate extra fervent ardour than the appliance of brute strength. regardless of the fierce debate raging approximately it in govt, society and the Academy, insufficient strategic figuring out surrounds the problem, prompting the pressing want for ―the first accomplished systematic international research of twenty first century state-initiated inner and exterior functions of brute strength.

Extra resources for Bombing to Win: Air Power and Coercion in War

Example text

Because of the limited destructiveness of conventional weapons, outcomes of conventional coercion are determined mainly by the target state's powers of resistance, which explains why pUnishment and risk strategies generally fail, why denial strategies often succeed, and why success tends to come later than expected. Nuclear coercion works the other way: nuclear destructiveness overwhelms any possible resistance. Why Conventional Punishment Rarely Succeeds Punishment strategies seek to inflict enough pain on enemy civilians to overwhelm their territorial interests in the dispute.

Cornell University, 1981), chap. 4. Explaining Military Coercion ately to cause massive casualties. Coercers can kill or starve significant numbers of civilians but rarely more than a small proportion of the population. There are no comprehensive data on civilian deaths in modern wars, but data on battle deaths, which nearly always exceed civilian losses, show that states rarely lose more than 2 percent of their prewar population. Even in World Wars I and II losses exceeded 5 percent of prewar population in only a few states.

Potential coercers may, however, still be constrained by humanitarian, domestic political, or alliance considerations. Using a nuclear-based risk strategy, the United States was able to compel China to make the necessary concessions to end the Korean War. By 1953 the broad outlines of an armistice in place had been agreed, but the Chinese were inflexible on several minor issues, the most important of which was the repatriation of Chinese POWs. To break the deadlock, the United States threatened nuclear bombing and lent the threat credibility by gradually escalating conventional air attacks during the spring of 1953 and warning that nuclear attacks would follow.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.54 of 5 – based on 21 votes