Below this level, the water is muddied across organizational lines. Properly organized, ABO can justify a squadron structure composed of EOD, disaster preparedness, fire fighters, power production, and airfield management. This structure would require breaking into mission territory reserved for civil engineering, but the advantage of joining the elements of ABO is worth the pain of reorganization. Civil engineering has been at the vanguard in transforming Air Force peacetime attitudes to a wartime perspective. 8 Historically, Air Force thinking has limited the warrior's mantle to aircrews and security police units charged with base defense.
Many individuals still view the rear echelon base as an invulnerable garrison.
This perspective has allowed most Air Force specialties to comfortably slip into the role of technician or resource manager, an approach that appears to work during times of peace but is ineffective during war. These organizations are good examples of the warrior spirit for future ABO operations and squadrons to emulate. However, an effective ABO structure at base level goes far beyond those units tasked specifically for full-time operability. Many secondary skills and considerable augmentation will be required to flesh out a wing capable of sustaining a base under attack. The recent experiences of naval units in combat in the Falkland Islands and Persian Gulf should serve as a useful reminder that just as warships are vulnerable so are air bases.