Air superiority is supposed to deliver a quick triumph. But history has shown that promise to be written on the wind
To explore the roots of Donald Trump’s Iran military strategy and the pugnacious rhetoric of his defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, means looking back 105 years. In 1921, a year before Benito Mussolini and his blackshirts marched on Rome to launch the Fascist era, an Italian general named Giulio Douhet published The Command of the Air, proposing a revolution in warfare.
Victory in the future, he said, would no longer come from the grinding trench combat of the great war. Instead it meant large-scale aerial bombardments, targeting not just combatants but civilians and civilian infrastructure and logistics.
“[It] is much more important to destroy a railroad station, a bakery, a war plant, or to machine-gun a supply column, moving trains, or any other behind-the-lines objective, than to strafe or bomb a trench.



With diligent planning and help from our allies and a clear objective victory from the air is achievable.
We just had none of those things.
This has literally never been true, and there are no examples of this ever happening in history, besides maybe the only use of atomic bombs, on Japan. Pure delusion.
Iraq 1991.
ETA: Ground pounders big mad.
Lol. Won via ground assault.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War#Ground_campaign
After air superiority was obtained.
True, and I’m not saying air superiority is not useful or critical, but it alone does not and cannot win a war. Your own example proves that wrong.
Yeah but even the ground war needed a clear plan, coordination with allies, and the other stuff I’m too drunk/high to remember.
Certainly can’t disagree with that