Documents / Document

The Army Air Forces in World War II, Vol. 1 (archived PDF)

Air Force Historical Studies Office · 863 pages · text from the file's own layer

This is Volume One of The Army Air Forces in World War II, titled Plans and Early Operations, January 1939 to August 1942, edited by Wesley Frank Craven and James Lea Cate. The University of Chicago Press first published it in 1948, and the Office of Air Force History reprinted it in 1983. The front matter explains how the AAF historical program was set up during the war. The index covers Pacific, Atlantic and European operations, and nothing in the text concerns unidentified aerial phenomena.

  • p. 303 …of Naval Opera- tions; Adm. Ernest J. King, Commander in Chief, U.S. Fleet; Gen. George…
  • p. 316 …So far as the Navy is concerned, Admiral King, as you know, is not only Chief…
  • p. 493 …Admiral King believed that the mines offered a tempting bait to the Japanese who were currently…
  • p. 526 …Hence Admiral King placed a bid for suffi- 461
  • p. 527 …t this stage of the war Admiral King had accepted the belief that his carrier planes…
  • p. 538 …plan by 2 9 June, when Admiral King submitted to the Joint Chiefs a proposal that…
  • p. 607 …type * O n 5 March 1942, Admiral King wrote to General Arnold as follows: “The experience…
  • p. 608 …s.’l A formal request by Admiral King to the Chief of the Army Air Forces…
  • p. 609 …In a letter of 9 March 1942 to Admiral King, he proposed “the estab- lishment of…
  • p. 614 …In June, Admiral King expressed the official Navy position on this point with the utmost clarity…
  • p. 615 …In a memorandum to Admiral King, General McNarney, Deputy Chief of Staff, on 26 May outlined…
  • p. 616 …viewed as a temporary deta~hment.?~ Admiral King’s reaction to these cautious proposals was expressed…
  • p. 618 …the same words as used by Admiral King a month earlier: the answer to the antisubmarine…
  • p. 621 …On 14 September, General Marshall wrote to Admiral King: “Experience with the First Bomber Command in…
  • p. 622 …T o General Marshall’s proposal of 14 September, Admiral King had replied that, although he…
  • p. 641 …54 A week later General Marshall, Admiral King, Harry Hopkins, and a small staff flew to…
  • p. 645 …that scheduled to operate from the United King- dom. Dry topic or no, organization must figure…
  • p. 684 …the principal air task in the United King- dom had long been conceived as strategic bombardment…
  • p. 707 …establishment of base depots in the United King- dom became the basis of action in January…
  • p. 724 …Implicit in all of the arrangements being made in the United King- dom was the belief…
  • p. 788 …Force, Pt. I ; Fleet Adm. Ernest J. King, First Official Report to the Secretary of the…
  • p. 793 …Memo for Adm, King from C/S, 17 Mar. 1 % ~ . 34. JPS 2I/j/D, 7…
  • p. 795 …4 Aug. 1942. 108. Zbid. 109. Adm. King’s Report on Battle of Midway, incl. in…
  • p. 797 …306, 29 June 1942; memos for Adm. King from Mar- shall, 26 June 1942, and for…
  • p. 802 …1942; CM-IN-0629, Chung- king to AGWAR, # # z , 3 Apr. 1942; memo for Gen. Arnold…
  • p. 805 …Ltr., Arnold to King, 2 5 Feb. 1942. certain evidence from all Allied and enemy sources…
  • p. 806 …Memo for King from McNarney, 26 May 1942. 7 1 . Ltr., King to Marshall, 10 June…
  • p. 807 …Ltr., Marshall to King, 14 Sept. 1942, TAB XIVA, in Bowles report; memo for C G…
  • p. 808 …to notes from Mar- shall and Adm. King). 3 2 . A I c m o for…
  • p. 814 …Forces to the United King- dom, App. A, 19 Aug. 1942. 50. Ltr., Col. H.L…
  • p. 851 …C.E., 48-50 Killin, Pfc, 219 Kilner Board, 1 2 0 Kimbolton, 63 I King…
  • p. 854 …in Chief, 515, 5 2 2 , 544. (see also King); controversy over air power vs. battleship…
T H E A R M Y A I R A R M B E T W E E N T W O W A R S
and These officers had come up in an atmosphere permeated
with Mitchell’s ideas, and they turned to such other theorists as were
available. It is often difficult, because of the multiple authorship of
military documents and the poverty of information concerning offi-
cers’ reading habits, to trace the evolution of a given idea in the Army.
One of the instructors at the Tactical School has indicated some of
the literature absorbed during this period: 1 3 7 Clausewitz (who was
“right in his time”) ;Frank Simon’s The Price of Peace (“a very good
book, too”) ; Liddell Hart; Goering (“the only foreign predecessor
we had to follow-except old Douhet”). One might suppose that
Douhet, who “really struck the first blow,” was most useful; his work
had been made available in the Air Corps in an incomplete mimeo-
graphed form, done into English from a French t r a n ~ l a t i o n . ~ ~ ~But
even he added little to what could have been gained from a few hours
devoted to Mitchell’s works.
Whatever the source of inspiration, the theory of air war expounded
at the Air Corps Tactical School may be summarized under the fol-
lowing points:
I . T h e national objective in war is to break the enemy’s will to resist and to
force him to submit to our will.13*
2. T h e accomplishment of this objective may entail actual destruction of his
power to resist, or merely the threat thereof, but in either case it requires
an offensive type of warfare. Hence the true mission of all components
of the armed services is to exert maximum destructive powers on the most
vital enemy
3. T h e immediate mission of the armed forces may be: defeat of the enemy’s
army, navy, or air force; the occupation of his homeland; pressure against
his national economy; or operations directed against vital centers within
his country. Under certain conditions the threat of a successful accom-
plishment of such missions will be sufficient to enforce our will upon the
enemy.141
4. These military missions are best carried through by the co-operation of the
three arms: air, ground, and naval. Each has its peculiar functions and
limitations. Thus aviation can aid ground forces to gain territory, but only
ground forces can occupy an enemy’s land. Aviation alone cannot pro-
tect our merchant marine or our troop movements by sea, but it can
unaided accomplish the other functions of sea power-defense of the
nation against waterborne invasions and reduction or elimination of
enemy merchant shipping. And, of the three arms, only aviation can
contribute significantly to all of the designated missions.142
5. T h e special mission of the air arm then should be to attack the whole of the
“enemy national structure.” Under conditions of modern warfare the
military, political, economic, and social aspects of a nation’s life are closely
and absolutely interdependent, so that dislocations in any one will bring
5 ’

About this file

Document, cited by the archive. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is under it. 863 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.