Saturday - April 17, 2004
Was Billy Mitchell Right?
People who know my disdain of Billy
Mitchell's and Giullio
Douhet's ideas would be shocked that I even ask if Billy Mitchell was
right, but I was watching a news report about aviation security against
terrorism and it struck me that these two buffoons might actually have something
to say about this topic. I doubt that they would have much intelligent to say
based on what they said and wrote while they
lived.Mitchell and Douhet (Douhet came
first, but Mitchell was more influential in the US) back in the 1920's and
1930's came up with the idea that wars would be won exclusively through air
power and that land and naval forces were mostly obsolete. They based this
theory on the prediction that aircraft flying over a city and dropping bombs on
the people would so thoroughly frighten them that they would instantly sue for
peace. This laughable idea was the basis for the ineffective strategic bombing
campaigns in the second world war.
Their theory has been proven wrong every time it
has been tried, but that didn't stop them from making an Air Force separated
from the army. Despite that their ideas have been discredited repeatedly,
perhaps there just might be something to their theory after all. Just look at
how the murderous Islamics have cowed us into requiring more and more intrusions
of our civil rights. Look at how some people demand that they be made 100% safe
from attacks and willingly surrender, and demand that others surrender their
freedom of movement and freedom from
searches.
It's curious to me, and it's
only an observation not backed up by any systematic study, that the same kind of
people who think that wars can be won by the mere threat of bombing are the same
type of people who tend to cower when threatened by terrorists. That is,
adherents (consciously or unknowingly adherents) of Douhet and Mitchell, are the
ones who think that lobbing a few cruise missiles at an Al Qaeda camp several
years ago would have some sort of deterrent effect on our enemies. I suppose
that to them the idea of being attacked by a small explosive is so horrifying
that they would immediately surrender. SInce they are such craven cowards they
must suppose that others are too. To them it is entirely rational to surrender
at the smallest provocation, or because of large scale bombardments. They
forget that people cannot be controlled by bombs, they can only be controlled by
people. So long as they have food and water, no bombs by themselves will ever
conquer a people unless the people want to
surrender.
But we've been surrendering
our civil rights. We have people frightened enough to demand that all cargo
coming into the country on plane or even by ship must be thoroughly inspected.
We have people willing to allow the government to search each and every
passenger flying on an aircraft without presenting a warrant. We have a lot of
people who are afraid.
So maybe Douhet
and Mitchell were right after all. Bombers can win wars. Aircraft can
terrorize a people into submission and defeat. I guess all it takes is for
there to be more cowards among the people. Let's hope that the American people
and Western Civilization show better mettle than that.
Go Back to the Start, Do Not Collect $200 Send me your two cents
|
