Combat Support Agencies : Civilian Force Of The Future

Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century written by Peter Warren Singer. In his book, Mr. Singer explores and supports his theory of how technology is quickly and decisively changing the way the U.S. fights wars. This book was written in 2009 and the author provides historical data up to 2009 on how the military relies on technology in the battlefield. Mr. Singer’s credentials include a Ph.D. in Government from Harvard and a BA from the Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton2. He has worked with numerous U.S. government agencies as advisor and continues to provide his services in that capacity. He has published books which relate to the military such as Corporate Warriors: The Rise of the

In a 2015 article, “Is U.S. military becoming outdated?” written by Stuart Bradin, Keenan Yoho, and Meaghan Keeler-Pettigrew, the authors argued that despite the U.S. military maintaining a position of global dominance “without peer” during conventional operations, it is not the ideal force against current and future threats. The authors claim that there are several negative factors arising due to the past sixteen years of war against several state and non-state elements, inferior cultural differences of government bureaucracy compared to commercial firms, and a misallocation of defense spending that leaves the US military waging war inefficiently while simultaneously losing technological dominance against current and future threats.

The department’s leadership is responsible for providing appropriate manpower and resources to each mission using an increasingly tight budget, while also following strict laws for high priority missions, such as nuclear defense, which mandate both high levels of training and manpower (Air Education Training Command, 2015). Additionally, warfare technology has become incredibly advanced. Due to this complication, the educational and technical requirements for military service members and employees are steadily increasing.

Our nation’s military continuously evolves to ensure success in future operations. This change is only be possible if our top leaders work in concert towards a common goal. The purpose of this document is to highlight how General Stanley McChrystal changed the manner in which the U.S. Military operates and communicates in an ever-changing environment.

In a documentary by Admiral Vern (2002), “the events of September 11, 2001 tragically illustrated that the promise of peace and security in the 21st Century is fraught with profound dangers”. The US foreign policies and interest in key geographic regions of the world sparks controversies resulting in state funded cyber attacks, cyber espionage and terrorism against the United States and its allied nations. When several attempts to cripple the United States and its allied nations through negotiations failed, enemy states and nefarious groups have shifted their focus to cyber attacks and cyber espionage. According to Gady (2016), “China continues cyber espionage against the United States”. Drezner (2014), “Washington and Beijing hardly agree on everything, but they agree on the big things, like maintaining an open global economy, reducing the likelihood of a military confrontation, and tackling climate change”.

The National Security Strategy outlines the plan, intent and focus for the Intelligence Communities actions, direction and funding priorities (Clapper 2014). The strategy outlined by then Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper focused on numerous factors that have challenged the strategy of the United States, which demonstrates the consistent need to integrate intelligence across the Intelligence Community to face the ever changing threats (Clapper 2014). Many of the specific and specified threats discussed by Mr. Clapper have been carried on by the present Director of National Intelligence, Daniel Coats, who detailed many of these threats in his Worldwide Threat Assessment that was presented to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (Coats 2017). Faced with numerous threats from a variety of directions, the three to focus on are the threats from cyber-attacks, human security and terrorist

Although the addition of this security measure is a valuable resources to administration, an in depth understanding into the threats the United States faces daily is an important component when analyzing National Security strategies. One of the most significant threats that the United States currently faces involves China’s largescale international growth. This rise in power extends to both economic growth, and military growth, both factors which threaten our position of power and stability.

There is a serious threat to America's current and continued security. This threat comes from reliance on the Internet. With the openness of the Internet and the potential for anonymity, the Internet becomes an easy avenue for enemies to stage a covert attack. “Some governments, like China, have made cyber-warfare a critical part of their military doctrine, in part to help counter the advantage the U.S. has in conventional and nuclear war fighting capability. The United States is highly vulnerable to a timed, well-organized attack from another state or no state

US military intelligence and the US army need a modern vision and a well-balanced relationship with policy or political orders

With the focus on terror-based groups and the Middle East over the last fifteen years, many in the United States (US) are unfamiliar with the threat more conventional nation-states pose to the country’s national security. China, Iran, and Russia are seen as the three biggest threats to U.S. national security. Although Russia does not dominate the intelligence disciplines of HUMINT, OSINT, and cyber, its strengths in SIGINT, IMINT, and MASINT make it the biggest threat to the US.

At this stage of this paper, assessing the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats provides an understanding for what is known and likely where the U.S. should move next to meet national information power within the global security environment. The strengths of the U.S. are quite large but should not be overstated, as a nation we have experienced this self induced information vacuum such as our isolationist culture after WWI. There is historical evidence through the adjustments and changes to our laws that suggest the best course of action that preserves civil rights and civil liberties, cementing our creed for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Assessing the weaknesses is more difficult and necessitates the input from

Over the years, both state and federal governments in the United States have changed drastically to become critical domains in both foreign and domestic policies/procedures. There are more than 220 organizations in relations to defense and homeland security efforts; they are all directed by the office of the National Intelligence, which comes from the executive branch of government (HugPages, 2014). Not only is the intelligence process used to track foreign military capabilities and scrutiny of foreign government intentions, it has been evolved over the years to fit many roles needed by the United States. One of the roles the intelligence plays is weighing in on terrorist plans, proliferation of cyber threats, nuclear threats, global warming, and many other areas. This community has been crucial in helping to support the

The central problem discussed in this paper is to determine the general capabilities needed to rebalance the Joint Force 2025 (JF25) considering the current strategic challenges and the global security environment. This paper proposes that the JF25 focus on its competitive advantages and curtail ineffective and expensive programs to preserve its ground forces’ capability to provide deterrence and defeat capabilities critical to our National Strategic Objectives. To support this position, this paper articulates the emerging threats to U.S. National Interests and highlights the key strategic direction of published Department of Defense (DoD) strategy and strategic concepts. Secondly, this proposal provides the broad capabilities that the JF25 must aggregate from each service of the DoD. Finally, this paper articulates and mitigates the inherent risks to its proposed capabilities.

The future of America’s dominance in the international technology sector is no longer secure. The emergence of countries such as China, whose economy functions under different operating framework than the United States, gives China a competitive advantage over the U.S. that poses a legitimate and imminent threat to the success of U.S. tech companies (Fallows). Not only does this unfair dynamic affect the U.S. tech market, it also threatens the stability of Sino-American relations (McCurry). This issue is deeply concerning to the Department of Homeland Security. The security

During the last fifty years, the global community has made extraordinary advancements in technology, public health, and human rights. The launching of the first satellite into orbit, creating new tools to combat infectious diseases, and expanding basic global human rights through treaties, protective actions, and billions of dollars in aid, have paved the way for coming generations to continually build a positive future. However, developments such as the vaccine for smallpox and polio, the improvement of air quality, and liberation of oppressed people under the guise of brutal authoritarians, humanity has been unable to make substantial progress in preventing wars and extreme acts of violence. The United States was reminded of this through the attacks on 9/11. These attacks were a reminder that even though this country has been leading the way in medicine, technology, and the global economy, there are those who want nothing more than to see us crumble like the Roman Empire. Due to this terrifying realization, the U.S. Government has created new agencies and intelligence centers, such as the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and National Counter Terrorism Center (NCTC), and enhanced the capabilities of others, such as the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) counterterrorism role, to combat existing and future national security threats.