Joint Force

War in the Shallows explores the operations of the Navy's three inshore task forces from 1965 to 1968. It also delves into other themes such as technology, tactics, and command and control. Finally, using oral interviews, it reconstructs deckplate life in South Vietnam, focusing in particular on combat waged by ordinary sailors.

6a. With respect to the author’s conclusions (either specified or implied), I accept or agree with the following and why: His explanations of the struggle to keep the Marine Corps alive and the early development of amphibious doctrine make this book a great tool in understanding the modern Marine Corps.

The American “way of war” can be seen politically through the evolution of military policy as political perspectives changed. Post-World War II reveals primary and consistent policies that lead American military policymakers to avoid major international conflict. Coined the Cold War, Americans began waging war

Following World War II the alliance between the U.S., Britain and The Soviet Union began to unravel as the USSR pushed for the spread of communism which threatened America and the free world. For the next few decades, America’s leaders would need to strategically combat the expansion of the iron curtain and communism. Issues broke out all over the world but the most significant “battles” were that of Berlin, Korea and Cuba. The U.S. contained communism in Berlin by remaining persistent, in Korea by battling, and in Cuba by taking caution.

The Cold War was a state of political and military conflict that tested the vigor and fortitude of a multitude of United States presidents. Throughout the Cold War, various different strategies and foreign policies were tried and tested by US presidents. However, the environment in which these policies operated in did not stay consistent. Correspondingly, the Soviet Union’s potency fluctuated consistently, meaning that during some periods the “Red Scare” was not nearly as threatening as others. The ever-changing state of affairs throughout the Cold War was spawned from a number of reasons, including both the belligerency of what was then the current Soviet administration and the acting effects of previously implemented American foreign policy.

While a commander’s staff conducts planning at any level, whether it is strategic, operational, or tactical, the importance of identifying both theirs and the adversary’s center of gravity (COG) is a critical part of the planning process. Three factors should be carefully analyzed in order to gain a full understanding of the COG; they are critical capabilities, critical requirements and critical vulnerabilities (U.S. Office of the CJCS 11 August 2011, III-24). Although a COG can be attacked directly, the indirect approach which seeks to destroy or neutralize the COG by attacking an adversary’s critical vulnerabilities can be a more efficient use of available resources. The United States Marine Corps’ Warfighting publication MCDP 1 draws a direct correlation between a COG and its critical vulnerability by stating, “we should focus our efforts against a critical vulnerability, a vulnerability that, if exploited, will do the most significant damage to the enemy 's ability to resist us” (United States Marine Corps 1997, 47). The Marine Corps favors the indirect approach to defeating an adversary’s COG because the functions assigned to them by the Department of Defense (DoD) require expeditionary operations and expeditionary forces typically are limited in size, assets, and resources driving them to target an adversary’s critical vulnerabilities.

After World War 2, faith in the United States government was at an all time high. A brief, superficial, and weak understanding of the history on the aftermath of World War 2 leads the reader to understand that not only did the United States help defeat the evil Nazis, the fascist Italians, and the imperial Japanese. In the wake of World War 2, the United States of America ended up cementing itself as a world power – if not the world power, usurping the empty throne previously held by Great Britain and subsequently sharing it with the Soviet Union. Yet as is typical, there can never be two champions. There can never be two reigning super victors – one of the two powers had to lose. So began the conflict that never was, the cold war – a global chess match of attrition. Neither the USSR nor the USA would outright engage in conflicts with one another, but in the thirst and pursuit for more influence and power, they continually opposed each other through pawn states on a global scale for approximately 44 years. This type of warfare was known as ‘proxy’ warfare, and though the dates specifically for the Cold War are not known, the common dates for the war range from 1947 to 1991. With this understanding, it can also be inferred that it was not just a war for power, it was a war of ideologies.

The United States of America has been involved in many different conflicts, foreign and domestic, popular and unpopular, spanning across four centuries and all corners of the globe. From the warm coastal waters of the American homeland to the atolls of the Pacific, from the winding inland rivers of Vietnam to the chokepoint at the Strait of Hormuz, American sailors have valiantly stood up to defend America’s interests at home and abroad. The Navy has had to continuously update its vessels and technologies in order to keep up with the rapidly changing times, and ensure we not only stay competitive with but surpass the foreign competition. No other period in history has undergone the swift technological evolution that our troops experience

The subsequent sections will propose how smaller and better-combined joint forces maintain lethality, mobility, and survivability. In spite of some associated risks, force adjustment is an opportunity to form an aggregate joint force. Nevertheless, these contractions will not mirror equally among the services. The result will be a lean joint force that maintains the ability to defeat conventional and asymmetric threats in all domains. Discussed in this order, Air Force, Army, United States Marine Corps (USMC), and Navy general structure will revolve around the integration of skills and capabilities. Next, discussion of the four categories of risk involved in the transition to Joint Force 2020 include operational risk, force management

In addition to Talisman Sabre 2013, I Corps developed and tested Pacific Pathways, which is a model similar to the Marines’ UDP. I Corps will deploy a HQs, tactical force, with an aviation detachment and enablers will deploy to the USPACOM AOR to participate in exercises and to respond to a contingency. Therefore, the regional alignment of I Corps, represents an opportunity to scale

The United States Marine Corps has an illustrious history forged in the trials of combat. Throughout its history, irregular warfare has and will continue to pose challenges for Marines facing new and radical enemy forces. The rapid, opportunistic, and flexible capabilities of maneuver warfare enables Marines to combat ambiguous enemies whose warfighting capability and doctrine is based on irregular warfare principles. Marine Corps units are organized and equipped to facilitate rapid deployment and to maximize the potential of each asset available to the Marine Air Ground Task Force Commanders. As we wage war against our nation’s foes, the elements of the Marine Air Ground Task Force are prepared to provide mutually supporting roles for the

A submission to the Faculty of the Joint and Combined Warfighting School in partial satisfaction of the requirements for Joint Professional Military Education Phase II. The contents of this submission reflect our writing team’s original views and are not necessarily endorsed by the Joint Forces Staff College or the Department of Defense.

Parts five and six bring together the personal and professional relationship between Marines themselves and the American public. These relationships, forged by the millions of men and women who have donned the Marine Corps uniform, are a result of training methods and careful selection. General Krulak gives the reader a taste of why Marines do what they have come to be known as America’s force in readiness. First to Fight has many good traits. The book, while easy to read and addictively interesting, never sugarcoats the intense conflicts between high level officials. General Krulak enhances the “official” record with personal accounts of events and people now legendary. His no-holds-barred approach to his writing makes General Krulak’s book both honest and educational. His explanations of the struggle to keep the Marine Corps alive and the early development of amphibious doctrine make First to Fight a must-read for anyone interested in understanding the modern Marine Corps. In parts of the book, General Krulak provides a mountain of detail. While these facts would be of great historical value for a reader who knows military structure and nomenclature, they tend to bog down the reader at points. The political volleys also tend to get tedious when the General describes the how the Marine Corps had to fight tooth and nail for institutional survival. These

The United States Marine Corps is a frequently misunderstood, occasionally maligned but more frequently mythologized division of the U.S. Armed Forces. Sometimes its role is perceived as overlapping the roles and responsibilities of its military counterparts such as the U.S. Army, the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Air Force. However, as the exhaustive text by Victor Krulak shows, it is far more often seen as enhancing, focusing and insuring the roles and responsibilities. As the original pressing of Krulak's text was completed in 1984, a great many of the sentiments that permeate First in Fight: An Inside View of the U.S. Marine Corps carry pointedly Cold War-related messages and imperatives. However, an open-minded consideration of the text demonstrates a particular relevance for the servicemen and women of today's U.S. Marine Corps.

For over four decades the citizens of the United States focused their attention to the seemingly interminable tension that existed between American and the Soviet Union. Fear of the USSR and the communist regime tormented Americans, who poured their energy into promoting and safeguarding the democratic values they had always been accustomed to. As the Cold War steadily subsided, the United States and the Soviet Union came together to repair the damage they had inflicted on one another since the end of the Second World War. With the Cold War in the past, the field of International Relations shifted its focus to a multitude of new issues that were on the rise. Issues that were not necessarily relevant during the Cold War, but have dominated global politics in recent years, are defined under the concept of human security. In order to accurately assess the universal political system in a post Cold War world, a more expansive definition of security is required.