Won: Air-sea Power And Allied V... — How The War Was

In , Phillips Payson O'Brien presents a revisionist history that challenges the idea that massive land battles like Stalingrad or Kursk were the primary drivers of Allied victory.

: O'Brien defines the true conflict as a thousand-mile-long air-sea "super-battlefield" where the Allies used their industrial might to inhibit Axis movement. How the War was Won: Air-Sea Power and Allied V...

Instead, O'Brien argues that the war was a global struggle for air and sea supremacy, won through production, technology, and the systematic destruction of Axis equipment before it ever reached the "battlefield". Core Arguments In , Phillips Payson O'Brien presents a revisionist

: Some historians, such as those on WW2Talk , argue that O'Brien underestimates the psychological and physical necessity of land armies to actually "kill the will" of the enemy and occupy territory. Core Arguments : Some historians, such as those

You can find further analysis of his arguments in discussions at the U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons or via expert lectures on YouTube .

: He posits that air and sea power destroyed over 50% of Axis military equipment during pre-production, production, and transit phases.

: He argues that land battles were relatively minor in terms of equipment losses and that the Red Army primarily engaged in a war of personnel, while the Anglo-Americans conducted the decisive high-tech material war. Phases of Attrition