View Single Post
  #59  
Old April 17th 04, 04:24 PM
Ed Rasimus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 17 Apr 2004 02:20:13 GMT, (BUFDRVR) wrote:

I think that is painting with too broad a brush.


Yes, it was, but Michel's anti-SAC bias shines throughout the book and is the
only negative aspect to his writing. I felt he could drop the anti-SAC attitude
and still make his point.


Sounds like your wearing your heart on your sleeve. Marsh simply and
clearly states the relationship between SAC and the unified command.
He points out the parochialism driven by the bomber-generals and the
failure of leadership that cost a lot of airplanes during LB II.
Statement of the events and pointing out the relationships isn't
"anti-SAC bais."

But, in LB II, we escalated to a previously unused level of force and
in a very short period restruck almost every significant target in the
area.


and struck them again and again and again....


Then your research probably disclosed the original prep order that
directed the wings to conduct a full scale, maximum effort for THREE
DAYS. The option to extend beyond the original three day effort was
because we still had targets to hit and we were still inflicting heavy
damage.

I've got to state that while participation doesn't guarantee
understanding, it does provide insight and a level of detail that
can't be gleaned from poring through micro-fiche archives of op-rep 4s
and unit histories written by a squadron Lt as an additional duty.


How about most of the sources Michel used (I even included his work)? Michel
did the same thing I did (plus conduct interviews). Are you saying his work is
suspect or does he get a pass "because he was there"?


I'm not saying either. He doesn't get a pass because of attendance and
his work is excellent. I have written a formal review of his book and
the two faults that I found (which don't outweigh the excellent
detail, the probing analysis and the extremely valuable enemy
perspective), were the short-shrift given to the daytime ops and the
emphasis on the NVN view of the battle as "the Dien Bien Phu of the
air war." If that was a "victory" for them it was most assuredly
Phyrric.




Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8