Peacetime military innovation through inter-service cooperation: The unique case of the U.S. Air Force and Battlefield Air Interdiction

Bibliography

• Aaron, Friedberg, Beyond Air-Sea Battle: The Debate over US Military Strategy in Asia (UK: IISS 2014).
   Google Scholar
• Anderegg, C.R., Sierra Hotel: Flying Air Force Fighters in the Decade after Vietnam (DC: Air Force History and Museum Program 2001).
   Google Scholar
• Armacost, Michael, The Politics of Weapons Innovation: The Thor-Jupiter Controversy (New York: Columbia UP 1969).
   Google Scholar
• Avant, Deborah, Political Institutions and Military Change: Lessons from Peripheral Wars (Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP 1994).
   Google Scholar
• Bacevich, Andrew, The Pentomic Era: The US Army between Korea and Vietnam (Washington, DC: National Defense UP 1986).
   Google Scholar
• Beard, Edmund, Developing the ICBM: A Study in Bureaucratic Politics (New York: Columbia UP 1976).
   Google Scholar
• Bielefeld, William, Air Interdiction: Will It Support AirLand Battle? (Ft. Leavenworth KS: School of Advanced Military Studies 1986).
   Google Scholar
• Builder, Carl, The Masks of War: American Military Styles in Strategy and Analysis (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press 1989).
   Google Scholar
• Canby, Steven, ‘Tactical Air Power in Armored Warfare: The Divergence within NATO’, Air University Review 30 (May–Jun. 1979).
   Google Scholar
• Cardwell, Thomas, ‘Extending the Battlefield: An Airman’s Point of View’, Air University Review (Mar.–Apr. 1983).
   Google Scholar
• Cardwell, Thomas, ‘One Step beyond – AirLand Battle, Doctrine Not Dogma’, Military Review 64/4 (Apr. 1984).
   Google Scholar
• Chiarelli, Peter and Raymond Gagnon, The Politics of Military Reform (Newport RI: U.S. Naval War College Center for Naval Warfare Studies 1985).
   Google Scholar
• Clodfelter, Mark, Limits of Airpower: The American Bombing of North Vietnam (New York: The Free Press 1989).
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, Eliot and Thomas Keaney, Gulf War Air Power Survey, Vol. 7 (Washington DC: U.S. Govt Printing Office 1993).
   Google Scholar
• Cote, Owen, ‘The Politics of Innovative Military Doctrine: The U.S. Navy and Fleet Ballistic Missiles’, PhD diss., Cambridge, MA, MIT, 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, Richard, The 31 Initiatives (Washington DC: Office of Air Force History 1987).
   Google Scholar
• Davis, Vincent, The Politics of Innovation: Patterns in Navy Cases (Denver, CO: Univ. of Denver Press 1967).
   Google Scholar
• DePuy, William, ‘Selected Papers of General William E. DePuy’, compiled by Richard Swain (Ft. Leavenworth, KS: Combat Studies Institute 1994).
   Google Scholar
• Dixon, Robert, ‘TAC-TRADOC Dialogue’, Strategic Review 6/1 ( Winter 1978).
   Google Scholar
• Ehrhard, Thomas and Robert Work, Range, Persistence, Stealth, and Networking: The Case for a Carrier-Based Unmanned Combat Air System (Washington DC: CSBA 2008).
   Google Scholar
• Etzioni, Amitai, ‘Who Authorized Preparations for War with China?’, Yale Journal of International Affairs 8/2 ( Summer 2013).
   Google Scholar
• Farrell, Theo, The Norms of War: Cultural Beliefs and Modern Conflict (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner 2005).
   Google Scholar
• Farrell, Theo and T. Terriff, The Sources of Military Change: Culture, Politics, Technology (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner 2002).
   Google Scholar
• Fitton, Robert, ‘A Perspective on Doctrine: Dispelling the Mystery’, Military Review 65/2 (Feb. 1985).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ford, James, Air Force Culture and Conventional Strategic Airpower (Maxwell AFB, AL: Air UP 1995).
   Google Scholar
• Futrell, Frank, Ideas, Concepts, Doctrine: Basic Thinking in the United States Air Force Volume II, 1961 – 1984 (Maxwell AFB, AL: Air UP 1989).
   Google Scholar
• Goldfein, David, ‘Joint Concept for Access and Maneuver in the Global Commons’, 8 Jan. 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Gordon, Michael, ‘Budget Crunch Gives Shot in the Arm to Growing Military Reform Movement’, National Journal 5 (Sep. 1981).
   Google Scholar
• Griffin, Stuart, ‘Military Innovation Studies: Multidisciplinary or Lacking Discipline?’, Journal of Strategic Studies 40/1–2 (2017), 196–224. doi:10.1080/01402390.2016.1196358
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grissom, Adam, ‘The Future of Military Innovation Studies’, Security Studies 29/5 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• Hammes, T.X., ‘AirSea Battle Isn’t about China’, National Interest, 19 Oct. 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Hanne, William, ‘Maneuver in the Deep Battle’, Military Review (May 1982).
   Google Scholar
• Hart, Gary and William Lind, ‘What’s Wrong with the Military’, The New York Times Magazine, 14 Feb. 1982.
   Google Scholar
• Herbert, Paul, Deciding What Has to Be Done: General William E. DuPuy and the 1976 Edition of FM 100-5, Operations (Ft. Leavenworth, KS: Leavenworth Papers 1988).
   Google Scholar
• Hines, John and Philip Petersen, ‘The Soviet Conventional Offensive in Europe’, Military Review 64/4 (Apr. 1984).
   Google Scholar
• Holly, John, ‘The Forgotten Dimension of AirLand Battle’, Military Review 65/8 (Aug. 1985).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Keefer, Edward, Harold Brown: Offsetting the Soviet Military Challenge 1977–1981 (DC: Historical Office of the Secretary of Defense 2017).
   Google Scholar
• Kier, Elizabeth, Imagining War: French and British Military Doctrine between the Wars (Princeton NJ: Princeton UP 1997).
   Google Scholar
• Krepinevich, Andrew, Why AirSea Battle (Washington DC: CSBA 2010).
   Google Scholar
• Larson, Todd, John Boyd and the AirLand Battle Doctrine (Ft. Leavenworth KS: School of Advances Military Studies 2012).
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, Kevin, U.S. Air Force Budget Posture over Time (Santa Monica, CA: RAND 1990).
   Google Scholar
• McCaffrey, Terrance, What Happened to BAI? (Maxwell AFB, AL: Air UP 2002).
   Google Scholar
• McPeak, Merrill, ‘TACAIR Missions and the Fire Support Coordination Line’, Air University Review 36/6 (Sep.–Oct. 1985).
   Google Scholar
• Momyer, William, Airpower in Three Wars (Maxwell AFB, AL: Air UP 2003).
   Google Scholar
• Reagan, Ronald, National Security Strategy of the United States (DC: White House 1987)
   Google Scholar
• NATO, Allied Tactical Publication 27(B), Offensive Air Support, May 1980.
   Google Scholar
• NATO and the Warsaw Pact: Force Comparisons (Brussels: NATO Information Service 1984).
   Google Scholar
• Nielson, Suzanne, ‘Preparing for War: The Dynamics of Peacetime Military Reform’, PhD diss., Cambridge, MA, Harvard, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• O’Hanlon, Michael and James Steinberg, ‘Beyond “Air-Sea Battle”: A Military Concept that Challenges Policymakers’, Washington Post, 23 Aug. 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Odom, William, The Collapse of the Soviet Military (New Haven: Yale UP 1998).
   Google Scholar
• Posen, Barry, Sources of Military Power (Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP 1984).
   Google Scholar
• Powell, Jon, ‘AirLand Battle: The Wrong Doctrine for the Wrong Reason’, Air University Review 36/4 (May–Jun. 1985).
   Google Scholar
• Puryear, Edgar, George S. Brown, General, U.S. Air Force: Destined for Stars (Novato CA: Presidio 1983).
   Google Scholar
• Rabinovich, Abraham, The Yom Kippur War: The Epic Encounter that Transformed the Middle East (New York: Schocken 2004).
   Google Scholar
• Rasmussen, Robert, ‘The Central Europe Battle-Doctrinal Implications for Counterair Interdiction’, Air University Review 29/5 (Jul.–Aug. 1978).
   Google Scholar
• Record, Jeffrey, ‘The Military Reform Caucus’, The Washington Quarterly 6/2 (1983), 125–29. doi:10.1080/01636608309450797
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Redden, Joseph, AirLand Battle – The Global Doctrine? (Carlisle Barracks, PA: U.S. Army War College 1983).
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, John, ‘Chief of Naval Operations Adm. John Richardson: Deconstructing A2AD’, The National Interest, 3 Oct. 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Rippe, Stephen, ‘An Army and Air Force Issue: Principles and Procedures for AirLand Warfare’, Air University Review 37 (May-Jun. 1986).
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, Bernard ‘Follow-On Forces Attack: Myths and Realities’, NATO Review, Dec. 1984.
   Google Scholar
• Rosen, Stephen, Winning the Next War: Innovation and the Modern Military (Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP 1991).
   Google Scholar
• Sapolsky, Harvey, Polaris System Development: Bureaucratic and Programmatic Success in Government (Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP 1972).
   Google Scholar
• Scott, Harriet and William Scott, The Armed Forces of the USSR (Boulder CO: Westview Press 1979).
   Google Scholar
• Sheehan, Kevin, ‘Preparing for an Imaginary War: Examining Peacetime Functions and Changes of Army Doctrine’, PhD diss., MA, Harvard, 1988.
   Google Scholar
• Sherman, William, Air Warfare 1926 (Maxwell AFB, AL: Air University Press 2002).
   Google Scholar
• Simpkin, Richard, Deep Battle: The Brainchild of Marshal Tukhachevskii (London: Brassey’s 1987).
   Google Scholar
• Slife, James, Creech Blue (Maxwell AFB, AL: Air UP 2004).
   Google Scholar
• Smith, Denny, ‘The Roots and Future of Modern-Day Military Reform’, Air University Review 36/6 (Sep.–Oct. 1985).
   Google Scholar
• Spinney, Franklin, Defense Facts of Life (5 Dec. 1980).
   Google Scholar
• Starry, Donn, ‘Extending the Battlefield’, Military Review 61/3 (Mar. 1981).
   Google Scholar
• Stein, David, The Development of NATO Tactical Air Doctrine: 1970–1985 (Santi Monica CA: RAND 1987).
   Google Scholar
• Tactical Air Command Manual 1-1, Tactical Air Forces in Joint Operations, Mar. 1966.
   Google Scholar
• Taft, Ralph and William Lind, ‘White Paper on Defense: A Modern Military Strategy for the United States’, The Congressional Record 22, 43, 25 Mar. 1976.
   Google Scholar
• Tomes, Robert, ‘The Cold War Offset Strategy: Assault Breaker and the Beginning of the RSTA Revolution’, War on the Rocks, 20 Nov. 2014.
   Google Scholar
• TRADOC PAM 525-5 1981, US Army Operations Concepts, the AirLand Battle and Corps 86, Mar. 1981.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Air Force, Air Force Manual 1-1: Functions and Basic Doctrine of the United States Air Force, 1979.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Air Force, Air Force Manual 1-1: Basic Doctrine of the United States Air Force, 1984.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Air Force Comptroller, ‘The United States Air Force Summary FY 1988/89 (Amended)’, Fourteenth Edition (Washington DC: Comptroller of the Air Force 1988).
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Army Field Manual 100-5, Operations, 1976.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Army Field Manual 100-5, Operations, 1982.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, New Technology for NATO: Implementing Follow-On Force Attack, OTA-ISC-309 (Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, Jun. 1987).
   Google Scholar
• U.S. General Accounting Office, The Comptroller General Report to Congress: Issues Identified in 21 Recently Published Major Weapon Systems Reports (Jun. 1980).
   Google Scholar
• U.S. General Accounting Office, ‘The Army’s Standoff Target Acquisition System—A Program Having Development Difficulties’, 18 Feb. 1981.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. General Accounting Office, ‘Tactical Intelligence: Army Needs to Reconsider and Test All-Source Analysis System Alternative’ GAO/NSIAD-94-49, (7 Mar. 1994).
   Google Scholar
• Van Tol, Jan, Mark Gunzinger, Andrew Krepinevich, and Jim Thomas, AirSea Battle A Point-of-Departure Operational Concept (Washington DC: CSBA 2010).
   Google Scholar
• Vlahos, Kelley Beaucar, ‘40 Years of the “Fighter Mafia”’, The American Conservative 20 Sep. 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Warden, John, ‘The Enemy as a System’, Airpower Journal 9/1 ( Spring 1995).
   Google Scholar
• Warden, John, The Air Campaign (New York: ToExcel 1998).
   Google Scholar
• Williams, Noel J., ‘Air-Sea Battle: An Operational Concept Looking for a Strategy’, Armed Forces Journal (Sep. 2011). http://armedforcesjournal.com/air-sea-battle
   Google Scholar
• Winton, Harold, ‘Partnership and Tension: The Army and Air Force between Vietnam and Desert Storm’, Parameters 26/1 ( Spring 1996).
   Google Scholar
• Zisk, Kimberly, Engaging the Enemy: Organization Theory and Soviet Military Innovation 1955–1991 (Princeton: Princeton UP 1993).
   Google Scholar
• Zook, David, The Fire Support Coordination Line (Ft. Leavenworth KS: School of Advanced Military Studies 1992).
   Google Scholar