Mine Resistant Ambush Hybrid Essay

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

The Engineer Explosive Ordnance Clearance Agent (EEOCA) was created in 2004 after a technical capabilities gap was identified between Combat Engineers and Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Technicians. In order to fill this gap, the EEOCA course was designed to equip more Soldiers in the United States (US) Army with the technical skills to be able to identify ordnance by classification, recognize all hazards and protective measures required, perform safe route clearance operations, and have limited blow in place (BIP) capability with unexploded ordnance (UXO). The skills acquired in the EEOCA course were ultimately intended to facilitate the freedom of maneuver for all US and allied forces.

With Trump’s election this year, his rhetoric of “Making America Great Again” and therefore revitalizing our military will soon become a reality. Trump has formally requested a reappropriation of funds; around $54 Billion, towards the US military. Part of Trump’s campaign promises had to do with making the military more robust; ensuring America’s title of militarily strongest in the world. In order to achieve this goal. Trump’s federal government has the option of many different aspects of the military to focus on. Of these, funding weapons of mass destruction, cyber security, and further military research and development prove themselves as most relevant in the contemporary military.

Chief Warrant Officer Three Teddy Vanzant is an extraordinary instructor whose technical abilities and extensive combat systems experience make him uniquely suited to train United States Army, Ordnance Warrant Officers. Teddy has spent the last 13 months completely redesigning the Programs of Instruction for the M1A2SEPv2, Abrams Main Battle Tank and the M3, Bradley Fighting Vehicle. He provided sound guidance and assistance to the CASCOM, Training Development during the validation of not only these two critical combat systems, but for the M109A6, Paladin as well. Due to these qualities and his dedication to the instructional mission, I recommend CW3 Vanzant to compete for the Distinguished Instructor Award, and the Army Logistics University,

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

The Armed Forces of the United States stand at an inflection point. Fourteen years of sustained combat forged a seasoned force capable of success across the range of military operations from military engagement to joint and multinational major combat operations. Today, this seasoned force is tasked to reset from a decade plus of counterinsurgency operations and evolve capability and capacity to defend the Nation from an increasingly complex security environment. Furthermore, this transformation must be completed in the face of a stark fiscal federal budget.

On August 2, 2011, Congress passed the Budget Control Act (BCA) of 2011 which cut $487 billion from projected defense spending over the next 10 years.1 The act also established a system of sequestration, which would cut an additional $495 billion from the defense budget.2 Altogether, the BCA would cut almost $1 trillion dollars from the Department of Defense (DoD). The passing of the BCA and the subsequent loss of funding mark an end to a 13-year period of robust budget allocations to support the global war on terrorism. From 2001 to 2013 over $1.6 trillion has been allocated to the DoD to support preparations for and execution of operations in various overseas areas.3 Within this $1.6 trillion, 94% of the funding was allocated to support operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.4 This robust amount of funding cultivated a culture within the DoD that there would always be funding available to cover costs at home and abroad. This culture is deeply entrenched within the United States Army due to large budgets provided to the Army over the past 13 years. In today’s environment of shrinking budgets, this culture can no longer stand true and must be changed. Establishing a cost-conscious culture (CCC) within the Army is critical to our ability to sustain the current Army force structure and make the needed modernization investments to ensure our capability to fight and win our nations wars.

Observers do not need to look far for the signs of a military-industrial complex that has become too powerful and involved in politics. The Army has repeatedly attempted to halt the production and spending on new tanks. The Air Force has spent almost $400 billion on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, nearly double the initial estimate. If the relationship between civilian and military leaders is to be mended, leadership decisions must not be influenced by the military-industrial

In a fiscally constrained operating environment and a reduced footprint overseas, the Department of Defense is consistently looking for ways to mitigate challenges associated with rapid global projection. By having multiple means to deliver sustainment to the warfighter, the JMMLV will prevent a single point of failure. The JMMLVs design provides an additional option along with current capabilities that exist to sustain operations and rapidly employ combat power. As Australian Maj Gen Rick Burr, Deputy Commanding General, US Army Pacific highlighted in a 2013 Defense News article concerning logistics, “The potential for anything to happen at any time is very real particularly with natural disasters…being prepared to respond to any crisis that could happen at short notice is clearly the most pressing issue at the moment.” (McLeary 2013) The United States and its ability to respond to a crisis is crucial for success and supporting global responsibilities. The use of the JMMLV offers advantages that will benefit Combatant Commands, the Services, Defense and Federal Agencies, and our coalition partners that routinely provide mutual support to one another to sustain operations.

Since the beginning of our nation and the development and expansion of the services that defend it, we have faced a myriad of complex issues: shrinking force structures, global security concerns, and fiscal constraints to name a few. From George Washington’s Continental Army, which evolved into the current Joint Force operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, we are faced with increasing complexity of the operating environment. This heightened complexity and ever shrinking available assets to satisfy these requirements, are the very reason that all commanders at all levels need to find innovative ways to increase operational efficiency in addition to lowering fiscal and asset demands. This new operating environment has also driven the Army Reserve to transform from a traditional strategic force to an operational force.

As Marine Corps General Joseph Dunford emphasized in his February 26, 2015 statement to the house subcommittee on defense, “The challenges of the future operating environment will demand that our Nation maintains a force-in-readiness that is capable of global response.” Given today's fiscally constrained environment, the United States Marine Corps (USMC) continues to experiment with new tactics, techniques, and procedures to enable mission efficiency and improve combat effectiveness. Recognizing the gap between traditional crisis response capacity and demand, geographic combatant commanders (GCC) require alternative and creative solutions to traditional employment challenges. The Expeditionary Force 21 concept is one way the Marine Corps is answering that challenge. Expeditionary Force 21 is the USMC’s vision and response to threats in the contemporary environment while observing the limitations of

The primary issue facing the United States Army in 2025 and beyond is its ability to operate in a fiscally constrained environment. According to the Army Capabilities Integration Center’s (ARCIC) primary initiative, Force 2025 and beyond, it “Is the Army 's strategy to ensure the future joint force can win in a complex world.” Furthermore, ARCIC’s initiatives will “consists of activities along three primary lines of effort: force employment; science and technology and human performance optimization; and force design.” Proponents of a lighter and more rapidly deployable force continue to argue for a dramatic downsizing of mechanized and armored forces.

Over the last twenty years the methods, tools and manning utilized for the U.S. to deploy and redeploy our troops and equipment have gone through environmental and philosophical transformations. Traditionally active duty units were deployed as complete

As a result of conflicting requirements from the Services and unforeseen excess of the Average Unit Manufacturing Cost, the JLTV program was threatened to its termination during its development. The protection, configurations, payload, weight and reliability requirements were changed during the process that were considered to be uncommon compared to the other programs. For example, “DOD had planned to award two contracts for the EMD phase, which was scheduled to last 24 months, but instead opted for a 48-month-long EMD phase before awarding Production and Deployment contracts in the second quarter of FY2016.”

Enemy Mine is a 1985 German American science fiction film directed by Wolfgang Petersen and written by Edward Khmara, based on Barry B. Longyear’s novella of the same name. The story talks about a spaceship pilot Willis Davidge(Dennis Quaid) and a Drac fighter Jeriba “Jerry” Shigan(Louis Gossett Jr.) who become stranded together on an inhospitable planet(Fyrine IV, an alien world uninhabited by intelligent life, two moons, a breathable atmosphere, water, native fauna and a hostile environment), who have to overcome their mutual distrust in order to cooperate and survive, and as time goes by Willis and Jeriba become unlikely friends, with a unique relationship. • THESIS; How does Enemy Mine show us that we are naturally more similar to our