The modern era of Air Force mobility operations has evolved to the point where there is an assumption that airlift and refueling are simply functions that will be in place. The recent experiences in both Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom point to the fact that airlift and its abilities to place a new, lighter, more maneuverable force into a theater rapidly and support ongoing combat operations is a fact. The question remains, is US doctrine, currently being used, the best possible method for commanding and controlling this force in theater. There is always tension between effectiveness and efficiency, and with a global air mobility support system, built by the US Transportation Command (TRANSCOM), there is no doubt there is a need for efficient and effective use of air mobility assets to accomplish the intertheater mission of strategic mobility. This mission is handled internally through a large and experienced organization staffed with experts from all facets of the mobility forces, the Tanker Airlift Control Center (TACC). But the TACC does not control theater-assigned assets; therefore, the question is, how effective is the command and control of mobility air force assets for theater-assigned assets such as the deployed C-130 or KC-135 unit. The modern doctrine of deploying a joint air operations center (JAOC) and controlling all air assets from this single point has presented opportunities in integration of air assets at the theater level. Has this same mindset allowed for specific noncombat air force assets and limitations to be swept aside. Both tactical airlift and tanker assets are in the precarious position of not being a combat air force asset, yet routinely flying combat missions requiring combat air force asset support.