This made me chuckle. . .

"Jim Baker" wrote in message
...

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 16:15:51 -0600, Scott Ferrin
wrote:



From this week's AW&ST

"Air Force May Form Strategic Command"


Would that also be known as "Strategic Air Command" with the
associated acronym of SAC?

Actually, it is a review of the "unified" command structure,
considering combining of the recently established Northern Command
with the long existing Southern Command to form a sort of N/S America
continental command. Other unified commands include Eucom, Pacom and
Centcom for examples.

Strategic Air Command was a "specified" command which gave it a
separate status from the operational control of the unified commands.
The other specified command was MAC.


Ed Rasimus

According to Aviation Week (April 12 2004 issue, page 23), it's not a
Joint
Staff initiative but rather an AF plan. The USAF is considering
reshuffling
it's commands to better provide forces for US STRATCOM. Currently, 8th AF
provides much of the manpower and equipment for use by STRATCOM and for
reasons unstated in the article, they think creating a new command,
"AFStrat", (Air Force Strategic Command) would do a better job than 8th
AF.
This has nothing to do with the Unified Command Plan in a structural
sense,
it's all about the AF performing it's role in manning/training/equipping
the
units that serve the combatant (Unified/Specified)commands. Just a guess,
but maybe the bombers that are still nuclear capable would move from 8th
to
AFStrat under this plan.

Specified commands as combatant commands? Are you sure of that? The usual
procedure is for the specified commands to provide resources to the unified
commands, which form the combatant HQ--or they can be a subordinate
component command HQ, as would be the case with FORSCOM under NORTHCOM
during the homeland defense mission.

Brooks


Cheers,

JB