Awe and Shock, or Blitz Re-Run?
The American-led coalition has unleashed an air campaign designed to "shock and awe" the Iraqi leadership into submission. The theory is that if enough destruction can fall on the heads of one's enemies in a short enough amount of time, they will see that further resistance is futile, and surrender becomes almost inevitable. The theory appears sensible, but experience suggests that this is not going to happen. Hermann Goering and Curtis LeMay both tried it, and it failed miserably.
The first mistake the theorists make is in suggesting that the enemy thinks in a rational way. This is not always the case, or more accurately, the enemy doesn't think in a way one's own side would find reasonable and rational. In the summer of 1940, the British logically should have sued for peace. Fortunately, Churchill and his people refused to see reason. The Viet Cong and North Vietnam should never have accepted the defoliation and devastation delivered by B-52s when surrender would have made so much more sense. Saigon is gone, though.
The other mistake they make is to believe that applying old technologies in new ways makes a revolution. While it is true that this war has seen more smart weapons used that all other conflicts and military strikes combined, they remain missiles and bombs, descendants of V-1s at best. Air power does not seem to have changed in 70 years despite the fact that the explosives can fly themselves.
Fortunately for America and its allies, General Tommy Franks is not relying on air power all on its own. Land forces moved in surprisingly early, and ultimately, wars are won by putting 19-year-olds with guns on the ground. This belies his own statement that this war will be "unlike any other in history." The real problem is that America and its allies don't have enough troops in position to successfully occupy Iraq even though they will probably take Baghdad within a month -- and that will lead to an insurgency that goes on for years.
This is not to say the "shock and awe" approach won't work. Perhaps, General Franks has found a new tool in warfare. But the evidence of past wars runs against him. He should as his allies the British, who were never so united nor so defiant (if one believes the stories) as when they were being bombed by the Jerries.