Evolution Of Army Doctrine For Success In The 21st Century

Like any other unified team, how does the United States Army gain leverage against our enemies who look to seize the free world? Well like many teams they have offensive operations, which are to seek opportunities to gain leverage against their foes or even gain a win in the end and then they have defensive operations. Defensive operations are the opposite of offensive operations where instead of trying to take advantage of the enemy the Army’s forces are trying to take a stance and push the enemy back. Thus allowing a chance to defend the territory where the soldiers stand and hopefully allow the soldiers to regain their forces. So like many other military forces we have used these tactics for many of years to defend our great nation, but of course over the years are tactics have had to change in order to adapt to different wars. So in this paper you will learn the most current tactics that our Army

The 1986 revision of the US Army, FM 100-5 “AirLand Battle” doctrine introduced the Clausewitzian concept of culmination point as a “key concept of operational doctrine.” Moreover, the new manual adopted the traditional German notion of Auftragstaktik, a decentralized command system with the commander devising a mission and then leaving the methods and means of achieving it to his subordinate

From the earliest recorded history, humans have waged war upon one another. To conquer and expand their empires, military leaders have experimented with hundreds upon hundreds of tactics and theories about how to wage these wars. The United States Army has refined and crafted the science of warfare and the art of leadership, designing six ‘warfighting functions’ that interrelate with each other. These warfighting functions shape the way an United States Army Officer plans for combat. The six warfighting functions are Mission Command, Movement and Maneuver, Intelligence, Fires, Sustainment, and Protection. The use of these functions can be directly related to the success of many victories the United States has seen, not only on the War level, but also for specific battles. In researching the Siege of Yorktown, it is clear to see that these warfighting functions were key to the victory of the siege. This decisive victory legitimized the then freshly founded United States of America.

Originally influenced by the strategic events seen throughout the Napoleonic Wars in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, the nine principles of war derived from the United States’ Army’s “Principles of War and Operations” outline a basic strategic guide on waging war. Shortly before the military adopted these guidelines, however, the United States of America saw civil unrest as the Southern states seceded to form the Confederate States of America. As the Union Army of the North battled the Confederate Army of the South, strategic principles similar to those outlined in the U.S. Army’s doctrine began to appear on the battlefield. Although the armies of the Union and the Confederacy both utilized strategic elements outlined in the United States’ Army’s “Principles of War and Operations”, the Union army’s stricter adherence to certain strategic principles resulted in their ultimate success.

Taking the field in 2003, the U.S Army, the most dominate fighting force in the world seized the initiative in Iraq. This paper outlines the staging of one command, the 101st Airborne Division, their commander Major General Petraeus, and the challenges of shifting rolls from combat to nation building and the effective transfer of power. Additionally, this paper will detail the Mission Command philosophy, specifically the describe action with the four step process of commander’s intent, planning guidance, critical information and friendly information as pertains to developing the commander’s intent during the initial occupation of Mosul, Iraq. While little was known about the current

Does anybody recall Operation Desert Storm when the United States attacked the nation of Iraq? It was a quick and steadfastly triumph directed by the United States Military and their partners. US use of insight from utilization of SIGINT, HUMINT, SIGNINT, and Symbolism airplane perception empowered them to wreck the Iraqi's powers. Having this influence of operational insight played a huge element in the death of the Iraqi powers to in the end considering rout.

Understanding and defining the impact on the modern Army today by the 442nd Infantry Regiment during WWII, is evident by their unique formation that stood out amongst organizations during that period. While trying to compare the differences in social acceptance from a unit composed almost entirely of Soldiers of Japanese ancestry, you must first understand the period in which this unit left its legacy.

Doctrine should be fluid, it must be allowed to adapt and change as the situation dictates. You cannot allow yourself to get stuck in a singular mindset about how war is fought. Our enemy’s technology and tactics are always evolving and we must always strive to evolve both to adapt to and overcome these

It is the Army’s primary mission to organize, train, and equip forces to conduct prompt and sustained land combat operations (ADRP 6-0, 1-1). To accomplish its mission, the Army utilizes its concept of unified land operations. Unified Land Operations, applicable to all Army operations is the seizing, retaining, and exploiting the initiative to gain and maintain a position of relative advantage. Such advantage provides a structure to prevent or deter conflict, prevail in war, and create the conditions for a favorable conflict resolution (ADP 3-0, p. 9). Critical thinking

Military Deception (MILDEC) is applicable at all levels of war and can be implemented within any phase of military operations to deter hostile actions and increase success of friendly defensive and offensive operations. To achieve these goals and objectives policy and doctrine which is the driving force for everything the United States Military does will need to be sound and able to navigate the geopolitical environment. These critical principles serve as one of the most important aspects when discussing or implementing MILDEC. In addition, these principles serve as a guide when developing plans by providing knowledge based experience (literature/doctrine) and nest authority with legal backing for the Geographical Combatant Commander (GCC) and the Joint Force Commander (JFC) when conducting MILDEC operations. In the following paragraphs, I will illustrate how creative thinking was incorporated through MILDEC into military action which lead to successful operations.

Since 9/11/01 the United States has been under attack by terrorism and George W. Bush started the war against terrorism but his presidency has ended. Since then Barack Obama has taken over as president and he has a new strategy, which consists of, protecting our homeland by constantly reducing our vulnerabilities, adapting, and updating our defenses, killing Osama bin Laden and many of his top Lieutenants, and giving law enforcement new ways to counter-terrorism. President Obama believes in order to hinder terrorism the US must increase the efficacy of our law enforcement, actively seek out to take out al’ Qaeda’s leaders, and constantly decrease our vulnerabilities.

Accordingly, the Army’s theory of warfare, Unified Land Operations (ULO), provides a framework, inherently supported by operational art that enables the United States to maintain a position of advantage. First, ULO and operational art

The United States has not stopped winning wars but the nature of both war and victory has changed. Adjusting to an evolving geopolitical environment, since World War II the U.S. has changed the reasons it employs military force and the types of wars it wages. Taken within the context of the each conflict’s era, the U.S. has met with mixed results in each conflict but ultimately has emerged victorious.

Over the last century, the evolution of warfare has predominantly been influenced by the introduction and technological advances of air power. The United States utilizes these new technological advances and the advantages of air power to achieve strategic objectives in their intervention of Islamic states in the Middle East. Their overall purpose for using air power in warfare is to minimize American causalities while eradicating insurgents to ensure national security as well as secure the United States' dominating economic position. Undoubtedly, air power

Giulio Douhet, in his seminal treatise on air power titled The Command of the Air, argued, “A man who wants to make a good instrument must first have a precise understanding of what the instrument is to be used for; and he who intends to build a good instrument of war must first ask himself what the next war will be like.” The United States (US) military establishment has been asking itself this exact question for hundreds of years, in an attempt to be better postured for the future. From the Civil War, through the American Indian Wars, and up until World War II (WWII) the American military’s way of war consisted of fighting traditional, or conventional, wars focused on total annihilation of an enemy. Since that time, there has been a gradual shift from the traditional framework towards one that can properly address non-traditional, or irregular wars. While the US maintains a capability to conduct conventional warfare, the preponderance of operations where the US military has been engaged since WWII have been irregular wars. Therefore, this question articulated by Douhet, as to understanding the character of the next war in order to properly plan, train, and equip, is certainly germane to the current discussion of regular war versus irregular war. In today’s fiscally constrained environment, the questions remains, which will dominate the future and therefore, garner further funding and priority. Based on the current threats and the US role as a superpower, the US