Could Airpower Have Won the Vietnam War?

Summary

Key Points:

1. Airpower was believed by some to have the potential to win or limit the extent of the Vietnam War.
2. The Rolling Thunder strategic bombing campaign failed to undermine North Vietnamese commitment.
3. Strategic bombing campaigns, even on a large scale, proved ineffective in changing the course of the war.
4. Air mobility played a significant role in making ground forces more effective in tactical operations.
5. The US Army achieved success with airborne forces, but this success was limited to the tactical and operational levels.
6. Inter-service conflicts between the Army and Air Force hindered the full utilization of mobility advantages.
7. Linebacker I operation in 1972 demonstrated the effectiveness of airpower in countering North Vietnamese offensives.
8. Sustained air commitment might have helped maintain South Vietnam, but it required a long-term US engagement.
9. Airpower alone could not resolve the political problems or change the North Vietnamese commitment to unification.
10. The ultimate victory of North Vietnam was inevitable due to the underlying factors and limitations of airpower.

References

• VIETNAM AIR WAR COLLECTION | The Runway (airforce.gov.au)
• MILITARY HISTORY GENERAL ARTICLES | The Runway (airforce.gov.au)
• Air Power and the Ground War in Vietnam: Ideas and Actions (af.edu)
• The Limits of Airpower or the Limits of Strategy: The Air Wars in Vietnam and Their Legacies > National Defense University Press > Publications | NDU Press

Source Information:

• Article Source: The National Interest: Defense, National Security, Politics and More
• Media Check:       National Interest - Media Bias/Fact Check (HIGH CREDIBILITY)
• RAAF RUNWAY: RATIONALE, GUIDELINES, LEARNING OUTCOMES, ETC