Army Transformation Essay

“For the Common Defense, a military history of the United States from 1607-2012” is a military historic book written by Allan R. Millet, Peter Maslowski, and William B. Feis. Millet is a historian and a retired colonel of the Marine Corps. Maslowski is a professor at the University of Nebraska. Feis is a professor at Buena Vista University. This book was published in September 2012. It focuses on chronologically describing the changes of the United States military for over 400 years. Even though that is the main purpose, it does include political information. Although this book does not have an exact thesis, its purpose is to inform readers of the creation and enhancements of the US military. At almost 700 pages, this book educates about

Over the course of history, the strategic environment has changed rapidly and is now more complex than ever before – it is currently characterized by unpredictability and disorder, and may yet manifest itself in the collapse of nuclear armed nations, destabilizing conflict in geo-politically vital regions, and humanitarian crises. A world of disparate actors – not all nation states – now exists. Unpredictable events will continue to cause strategic surprise. The widespread effects of past conflicts such as World War II, Vietnam and the Iraq war are still being felt and have created significant strategic repercussions. The failures of these conflicts are the result of our military and political leaders’ failure to quickly adapt to wartime conditions. This occurs because of a general refusal to commit to a military culture of learning that encourages serious debate, critical assessments of our military operations, and challenges to our doctrine in the face of emerging change. Additionally, leaders have struggled with the critical responsibility of forecasting and providing for a ready force, one that is well-resourced and prepared to conduct future operations. It is the responsibility of our military and political leaders to send our military to war with a ready force, and a strategy that will ultimately result in victory. But understanding war and warriors is critical if societies and governments are to make sound judgments concerning military policy.

The concept of war as a static and unchanging occurrence is an outdated and dangerous miscalculation. More accurately, war is a fluidic, evolving and shifting phenomenon constantly reinventing itself, rendering stagnant, inflexible principles potentially disastrous. Consequently, as students of war and future players in this transforming theatre, the study of eras of significant development is an extremely relevant pursuit. Recognizing the need for adaptation and the creation of doctrine is now a prerequisite for any effective modern commander. War is unpredictable in nature and particularly so in current theatres of operation, in which change is rapid

Its six months before your military retirement date. You have made several preparations for your transition into the civilian world. The one thing you want to do is make sure you have all the checks in the block so that you have a smooth transition where you do not have to worry about anything after you have gone on terminal leave. Even though through the leadership and management styles picked up through a military career, you think you are ready to step out in the civilian world. Military personnel must realize that their lives will soon change; some may have a difficult time transitioning. Suddenly it is your last day in the military. Shock has come upon you. Either let the stress get to you and

There is a sense that modern weapons during the 20th century proved to be the most technological advancements and thus created competition in which sprawled into a new stage of warfare enlightenment. At the brink of the war and the salient of forces perhaps the most technological tool used had been the trenches. The pursuit of territorial conquest would halt at the trench lines inventing a new progression in how war is envisioned today. The disadvantages often outnumber the benefits of war, however, war managed to create a boosted in advanced warfare starting as early as the Franco-Prussian War. As the war progressed during 1914, items such as uniforms called for change. The sense of pride in nationality struck in numbers and not in bright colors. For the sake of duty and country was the most powerful drive including those who sought ground in the western lines.

This is your initial counseling, as your direct supervisor and Team Leader. I will underline what is expected of you as my soldier.

During the time period of 1789 to 1914, several changes began to occur within the European military. Leaders began changing their techniques on how they would approach battles, placement of their men, what kind of equipment they would utilize, along with their means of transportation, how would they communicate with others, along with several other changes. During this time period, the use of technology began to increase which had allowed for the battles to become easier for those using the new technology. There were three important changes that had occurred in the European military which included: transportation with the service of trains and railways, the newest weapons such as the breech-loading rifles, and communication by using telegraphs. With these three inventions, this had changed the outcome on wars and battles for the days to come.

When most people talk about World War I, they typically only talk about the Western front. The Eastern front was entirely different compared to the Western front but equally as ghastly. Nonetheless, the one thing both fronts had in common was the vitality of the German army, which was the only country that fought a two-front war, as it had to fight in the West against the Entrance powers of France and Great Britain and in the East against the Russia. Germany had to bear the brunt of the fighting on both fronts as Austria-Hungry proved incapable of resisting Russian offensives without German support. The support of the Entrance and Central powers’ home fronts were essential to the war efforts and came in multiple forms such as economic assistance or social acceptance. For instance, the West proved to be an effective adversary against the Central Powers as the Entrance Powers’ approach to economic warfare disheartened the Central Powers’ armies and helped undermined their ability to wage total war. Total war demanded total mobilization of all a nation's resources, but what the most important resources were, differed between the two fronts. For example, vast munitions industries had to be built to provide supplies for the stalled armies on the Western front but in the East, providing transportation and the mobility of such transportation was the most significant challenge. While both fronts faced their own unique challenges, overcoming such challenges was key to military

Force management, or what is really otherwise known as planned comprehensive change, is in reality a complex and interwoven process. Though it was designed within the confines of a systemic approach referred to as the DOTMLPF (Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership & Education, Personnel and Facilities), in reality it is meant to enable both dutiful and well-thought out change as well as faster, more urgent adjustments in accordance with the evolving nature of war and information gathering tactics. The Army, as one branch involved in this initiative, focuses most of its attention in this regard on the organizational sector because of the way it facilitates an adequate and democratic step-by-step system of review (Student Reader, F102:2). But the fact is that even this initiative remains multi-faceted and appears to be rather bureaucratic in nature (it has five phases, which seems antithetical to an urgent change process), which might not be surprising since implementing the type of changes that are demanded can have major implications of all sorts. Still, it does appear that this concentration is being well received and that it will eventually serve its goal even if it does not appear that way when detailed on a point by point basis.

From the day I met my recruiter, I took the first steps into the transformation all young men and women must undergo as they start their journey to become a United States Marine. This process cannot be achieved in one day and must be continuously reinforced. From the unit leaders to the newest Marine in the unit, all Marines have a role to play in sustaining the transformation. Throughout this paper I will go into further detail on the different ways of how my unit fails and succeeds at sustaining the transformation, and what I can do to guide my subordinate Marines to success. To be able to successfully sustain the transformation you must instill the unit’s history and sense of mission, practice drill, be a family oriented unit, have a good sponsorship program, assist in cohesion and unit obstacles, and finally instill discipline.

As stewards of our profession, commanders ensure that military expertise continues to develop and be passed on to aspiring professionals through operational development. It is during this developmental phase that Professional Soldiers put their knowledge and skills to the test. Operational Army units certify and recertify their Professional Soldiers through repetitive and realistic training events including the Combat Life Saver Course, platoon live fires, and exercises at the National Training Center. In the course of these challenging and realistic experiences, the Army’s operational units develop Soldiers and leaders prepared to maintain high standards, discipline, and operational readiness. Operational development and adaptability will continue to drive changes in Army doctrine, organization, leadership, and education as we enter the post-war era. Without this kind of development, the Army could not maintain a well-disciplined professional fighting force.

“Leadership is the art of getting someone else to do something you want done, because he wants to do it”. -34th President of the United States Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Western society has centuries of military history, and as a legacy, today almost every military organization rely on technology and tends to have the most superior technology, which will be used in order to reduce its casualties and make total destruction of enemy forces. For example, nuclear, biological and chemical weapons as a weapons of mass destruction. Furthermore, the use of all sorts of unmanned aircrafts that caries devastating deadly force. Considering innovations in the military institution, it is clear that there is bigger guarantee of success by innovations. Railroad and communication still play crucial role in present militaries. Continuous innovations are present in changing of tactics, techniques and procedures in order to fallow the present threats. Little has been change in determining the decisive point and action, and also for present conflicts is the destruction of the army or capturing the capital. The most present example of decisive point is the second golf war where the US troops and the coalition invaded Iraq. First decisive point was the destruction of the Iraqi army and second decisive point was capturing the capital. And now we are all witnessing the battle for Mosul as a decisive point in defeating the Islamic state. Armies of the 21 century are characterized by strong discipline and training as a legacy

Adaptive leadership is becoming widespread in the United States Army amongst junior officers in leadership positions that require quick thinking and innovation. Leonard Wong discusses how the versatile and unpredictable enemy and situations in Iraq produces adaptable junior officers. These officers are learning to make decisions under chaotic conditions and are becoming more mentally agile. The Army is changing. The Army is transforming its capabilities in the war in Iraq to be effective and successful. General Schoomaker states that we will not accomplish our goals as a nation in the 21st century unless our Army becomes much more agile but with the capacity for long term, sustained level of conflict. The Army is in the process of

Clausewitz defines war as an “act of force to compel our enemy to do our will.” The nature of war is enduring yet the character of war changes over time. Current US strategic guidance is advancing the point of view that since the character of war has changed to focus on irregular wars then the US military should prepare for a future of irregular wars. This shift in focus forgets that the nature of war is enduring and in order to be successful, we must prepare for all types of conflict. This paper will define the types of conflict and the likelihood of each followed by a discussion of US strategic guidance and ending with an analysis of the training resources and force structure requirements needed to achieve success for all types of