Revolt of the Admirals: Difference between revisions
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz mNo edit summary |
John Leach (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "{{subpages}}" to "{{PropDel}}<br><br>{{subpages}}") |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{subpages}} | {{PropDel}}<br><br>{{subpages}} | ||
Taking place primarily between 1948 and 1949, but affecting United States [[strategic bombing]] policy for years afterwards, the '''Revolt of the Admirals''' initially appeared to be a funding argument between the [[B-36]] bomber and the Navy's proposed "supercarriers". It actually addressed a broader question of service roles and missions, <ref>{{citation | Taking place primarily between 1948 and 1949, but affecting United States [[strategic bombing]] policy for years afterwards, the '''Revolt of the Admirals''' initially appeared to be a funding argument between the [[B-36]] bomber and the Navy's proposed "supercarriers". It actually addressed a broader question of service roles and missions, <ref>{{citation | ||
| url = http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/acsc/98-166.pdf | | url = http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/acsc/98-166.pdf | ||
Revision as of 14:18, 8 April 2024
| This article may be deleted soon. | ||
|---|---|---|
 Taking place primarily between 1948 and 1949, but affecting United States strategic bombing policy for years afterwards, the Revolt of the Admirals initially appeared to be a funding argument between the B-36 bomber and the Navy's proposed "supercarriers". It actually addressed a broader question of service roles and missions, [1] beyond the Key West Agreement. It is generally seen as having been won by the Air Force, sending a number of admirals into retirement. The Air Force retained nuclear primacy certainly before the first Single Integrated Operational Plan studies at the end of the Eisenhower and beginning of the Kennedy Administrations, and arguably until the creation of United States Strategic Command to replace the Strategic Air Command. References
|
||
