How Airpower Has Changed The Nature Of War

Airpower has forever fundamentally impacted the character of war however; it may have influenced, but probably not fundamentally, changed the nature of warfare. Clausewitz defined the nature of warfare as violent, full of chance, conducted with reason, and always plagued with fog and friction. Therefore, it is theorized or assumed that the fundamental nature of war will not change and when war is waged, it will adhere to Clausewitzian tenants.
From the earliest balloon uses in the US Civil War to the first use of airplanes in WWI, airpower was initially employed to support Army ground movements and artillery spotting. Since then, airpower theorists developed new innovations, but just the tip of the iceberg for the overall use of airpower.
For centuries, world class navies were judged by the quality and quantity of ships of the line, which were utilized to gain freedom of action on the high seas by destroying other great power ships of the line. Since the first catapult launch of an aircraft from a ship in 1915 and Billy Mitchell’s bombing campaign of 1921, capital ships of the line for the era were forever doomed. “Air Service bombers sank several unmanned, anchored ships, including battleships.”3 This proved battleships were no longer viable as it “showed aircraft could protect an area much larger than (...) naval ships at a much cheaper cost.”4 The British raid on Taranto Harbor in 1940 and the Japanese raids nearly a year later at Pearl Harbor sealed the fate of the battleship and forever changed the character of naval
Since ancient times, whichever army or force that took and maintained the high ground was able to secure freedom of action for its own forces. The country or armed force that could glean as much intelligence about an enemy increased its chances for success in a battle with the hope of reducing fog and friction. So as technology influences the character of airpower…does it initiate a glacial change to the nature of warfare? Although Clausewitz may dominate for the foreseeable future, one could argue that as technology drives asymmetrical responses, warfare in general could be transformed. Already, drone pilots are removed from theater, but witness the effects of their targeting as if it were a video game. Then afterwards, they leave work to attend a little league game for their son or daughter. As technology grows, the impersonal nature of warfare could as well as localized violence at the end game becomes the norm, the potential for an even more violent peer-to-peer competition may