a. The Unified Land Operation concept is an attempt to refocus commanders on the idea of organizing activities and forces to achieve a position of advantage over the enemy force by seizing, exploiting, and retaining the initiative. The intent is to create a balance between combat and stability tasks or lethal and nonlethal tasks. b. The AirLand battle doctrine from 1982, define the Army’s approach to generating and applying combat power at the operational and tactical levels, to securing or retaining the initiative by aggressive means. After the deserts of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Iraq, as part of a joint and coalition force, the Army identified that this doctrine and force structure was not firm neither suitable enough for all kinds
On July 30, 2008, a bloody battle involving Coalition forces took place in the mountainous eastern Afghan province of Nuristan. This was the Battle of Wanat and the devastating amount of Coalition casualties began a vigorous investigation by the United States Army. The village of Wanat, defended by Second Platoon, Chosen Company, Second Battalion, 503rd Infantry Regiment, 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team would fall victim to numerous bad decision made by higher command. Although the men of Chosen Company fought hard, they ended up surrounded, vastly outnumbered, and without any Battalion assets. This paper will argue the reasons for the disastrous outcome of the Battle of Wanat; examining the effective company leadership exploiting effective
The purpose of this paper is to describe how operational art and design led to the success of operation overlord during WWII. Applying Operational art and Design During Operation Overlord Understand operational art and design was critical for the AF during WWII. Operational art is the way commanders and staff approach operations using
Realizing the need, Major General Petraeus soon began to employ the division to work local nationals to restart water and electricity and working to reopen schools (Lundberg, 2008). Lacking any guidance from his leadership, Petraeus took many prudent risks in order to further see these plans through by utilizing his own assets. For example, according to Lundberg, he utilized assets such as Army engineers to begin clearing rubble and debris from cities, villages, and roadways. Conclusion Providing a strong leadership approach and willingness to take risk, Major General Petraeus was put on a mission to develop and implement strategy to establish stability in Mosul, Iraq.
According to Clausewitz, military commanders must first be aware of the three most important strategic objectives of war: (1) to conquer and destroy the armed power of the enemy; (2) to take possession of his material and other sources of strength, and (3) to gain public opinion.1 To attain the strategic objectives, Clausewitz requires the application of three decisive military principles: military commanders must apply unrelenting pressure and energy to defeat the enemy; military commanders must mass combat power against the enemy’s vulnerability, creating or revealing additional weaknesses that the attacking force can exploit; and commanders must capitalize on speed, surprise, and shock to destroy the enemy. Clausewitz insists that
The American military has always worked hard to maintain peace, while still being prepared for war if that time comes. As the Federalists conveyed, we cannot predict when an attack is going to come, and a single, unified force is much more forceful than independent forces. Alexander Hamilton explains in his essay, “The Necessity of a Government as Energetic as the One Proposed to the Preservation of the Union,” why he believes standing armies are crucial for defending the country, “...it is impossible to foresee or to define the extent and variety of national exigencies, and the correspondence extent and variety of the means which may be necessary to satisfy them” (the Penguin Group, 1961, 153). If this was true at that time, how much more true could it be today as strife between nations seems to be flourishing? As America’s power grows, our use of military forces abroad has become increasingly critical.
By definition, “mission command is the exercise of authority and direction by the commander using mission orders to enable disciplined initiative within the commander’s intent to empower agile and adaptive leaders in the conduct of unified land operations,” according to ADRP 5-0. Mission command is about knowing when to change the task to fit the purpose. This paper is intended to analyze the mission command of one side of the battle, focusing on the commander’s role in the operations process. The Battle of Bunker Hill was the most important battle of the American Revolution because of Colonel Prescott’s superior command and control.
• Combined Forces Land Component Command (CFLCC) had six general officers; Transitioning to from a Corp to a CFLCC requires more general officers and requires an increase of personnel which are polled from the Joint Manning Document (JMD), the table of organization that authorized the positions on the joint staff. • Deciding where to place critical command elements • A corps headquarters was the Army’s highest tactical headquarters and normally functioned at the tactical and operational levels of war. During, the transitional process to a CFLCC, however, the corps is required to operate at the tactical, operational, and theater-strategic levels of war. Once augmented, Army doctrine also held that the Corps might have responsibility to create
From my perspective and analyses of some primary resources, I believe religion issue played an undeniable part among many other reasons. Even Hulagu’s personal religion perspective, background, and hatred for Islamism could be essential reasons behind these military
Thesis Statement Operation Anaconda was a military operation that took place in the Shahikot Valley of Afghanistan. It occurred during the beginning of the war against terrorism in March of 2002. The intent of this operation was to push enemy Taliban and al Qaeda out of the region with possibility of capturing some of the enemies’ top leaders. The battle was ultimately a success; however, this outcome came only after many significant issues within mission command. Despite careful planning and a strong military force, the failure of the command structure during this operation can be attributed to inadequate communication, a lack of flexibility, and a failure to account for the terrain and enemy capability.
Joint Planning for Operation Anaconda SFC Spurlock, Matthew MLC Class 005-18 Joint Planning for Operation Anaconda Since the beginning of the Global War on Terrorism, there have been numerous battles. One of the most important battles that shaped future joint planning of operations was Operation Anaconda. The outcome of this operation was ultimately successful, however, the original intent from the commanders were not met due to errors in the joint planning process. Joint planning during Operation Anaconda proved ineffective because of inaccurate intelligence about the terrain and weather, the exemption of Air Force and Navy during the initial planning phase, and false assumptions about the enemy. Intelligence Intelligence Preparation
Shortly following the conclusion of the United States’ conflict in Korea, the American military once again deployed its service members to Eastern Asia to combat and contain the spread of Communism; this time in the form of the Democratic Republic of North Vietnam. While the vast majority of the American populace recalls the Vietnam War as primarily an exercise of ground forces and maneuver, an often-overlooked aspect of the war is the significant contribution to strategy and successful adaptation to threats demonstrated by Air Defense Artillery Soldiers of the era. One of the more proud moments for the Air Defense Artillery Branch was their pivotal role in the Vietnam War. From the branch’s only Medal of Honor winner, to the Duster, and
Although many lives were lost in this effort, both enemy and our own, we outgrew their military tactics
Therefore, terrain is about situation, distant or immediate, difficult or easy, opportunities and risks and then the command is the capability and attitude of the leader to manage the country. Last, doctrine are refers to the organization and
Ridgway, a general during World War II once observed, "What throws you in combat is rarely the fact that "your tactical scheme was wrong but that you failed to think through the hard cold facts of logistics. " Logistics is the key element in western warfare, more so in the 21th century than ever before. The Wests’ success on the modern battlefield has been dictated by how well a commander has managed available logistical support. The United States success in major wars and several minor wars or conflicts in the 20th century are linked more directly to the ability to mobilize and bring to bear economic and industrial power than any level of strategic or tactical design. Operations during the Gulf War to liberate Iraq illustrate this point.
Battle of Leyte Gulf The Battle of Leyte Gulf is also known as the Battles of Leyte Gulf and was fought October 23-26, 1944 between The Japanese Imperial Navy and the US Navy near the islands of Leyte, Samar and Luzon. This battle is known as one of the greatest battles of all times as well as the largest naval battle fought in modern history due to 200,000 soldiers involved. In 1942 General Douglas MacArthur had promised the Filipinos that he would return to liberate them. On October 20, 1944 - a few days before the Battle of Leyte Gulf began- General MacArthur kept his promised and arrived in Leyte with the Allied Forces and the US Navy’s Third and Seventh Fleets as support for his invasion (8 Facts About the Battle...that will blow your mind).