The Discipline Of Military History

“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

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.

In the study of military history, historians at times use what is known as the “fog of war” technique with expectations of keeping away from the historians’ fallacy. In this approach, the actions and choices of the historical subject are assessed primarily on the premise of what that individual knew at that time and not on future developments that the individual could not have known. Fischer’s approach is a scientific-like “what and how” only approach and rarely fields the question of “why.” Fischer states that the “why” deals with the metaphysical issues that bring no definitive results. Fischer’s work shows that historiography can only be taken seriously if it is practiced according to strictly empirical procedures and can only be done by asking the correct questions and answering them according to the strict methodology of “historical logic.” The historian’s task is to solve problems, to ask appropriate questions and to seek answers by researching the information based on archival and other methods of research. Interpretation is inevitable, but the interpretation should conform to the

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.

In 1878 after the publication of his book the Armies of Asia and Europe, Upton would turn his attention to the completion of reforming the American military policy. Upton’s publication explained his view of the history of the American military the shortcomings and failures that endangered the nation. The reform Upton proposed for expanding the Army organization, was an effort to apply the lessons learned from previous American conflicts as well as his observations from other nation’s armies during his career. Lessons learned is a term we frequently use in today’s military. We conduct After Action Reviews for every event, task, mission, and operation conducted. The point is to learn from

Their have been continuities and changes over time with respect to how the United States constructs its military. Things have stayed the same and things have changed from 1776 to 2015. Also, the same topic can be handled differently based on many factors. For example, the source of the information plays a role in how that information is presented.

History is a remarkable subject that offers and eagles eye view into the past. With textbooks such as, Hist3, a great deal of interesting information can be acquired. However, a common misconception runs rampant through students minds; the idealism that history is useless and that the subject is that of a drag. Who can blame them? Our text books can only do so much in terms of providing the means in educating ourselves when we’re not in a class room and when given the opportunity to appear in class we have the luxury of (hopefully) having and interesting professor to enlighten us on all the side conflicts, affairs, and bloodshed that has happened. Even so, when we as students have exhausted the book and our instructors, we have the privilege

An Army White Paper: The Profession of Arms details an in-depth analysis into what it means for the Army to be a ‘Profession of Arms’ and what it means to be a ‘Professional Soldier’. It is not an authorative article nor is it directive, but more of an actual point of discussion. It all allows the reader to apply some critical thinking to the subject matter and to form their own assessment, as well as applying the role of a Human Resources Sergeant to the subject matter.

when one lacks experience, one must refer to second hand information—the documents and journals I’ve asked you to read hundreds of times. You may be a fine warrior, but your knowledge of history and political affairs is minimal.”

Unique systems of finance such as nation state resources, levee en masse, and alliances provided the means to build, strengthen, and maintain military forces for war. Innovation was used to change organizational design and maneuver practices which allowed the command and control of large military forces and successful engagements of the enemy. Discipline allowed forces to understand and study tactics through Bildung and Nationalism among troops allowed forces to move great distance by pillaging for logistic resources without deserting their units.

The western way of war consists of five foundations that have shaped a significant amount of military cultures; the foundations are superior technology, discipline, a finance system, innovation, and military tradition. Perhaps people believe that discipline is not one of the most important foundations of the western way of war, since people tend to emphasize technology. However, discipline is the key to maximizing the other four foundations before and during conflict. Historian Geoffrey Parker agrees that technology can give a military advantage, but it is not sufficient without superior discipline. That is because discipline consists of the ability of armies to act within battle plans even when not supervised, obey orders, exercise loyalty, and restrain their fears when faced with danger. Discipline as a western way of war has influenced military cultures from the Roman Empire to today’s militaries. Discipline shaped military cultures by how they prepared for war, effectively giving them the ability to act during combat and expanding commander’s operational reach, thus aiding in conflicts throughout history and increasing the likelihood of defeating the adversary.

Krulak's telling of the Corps' history is among the sections which retains its relevance. At all points, Krulak's historical reporting is clear, straightforward and in the cases of World War II, Korea and Vietnam, strengthened by the author's firsthand and experience-driven accounts. Certainly, Krulak's experience is among the text's most important virtues. Indeed, this also informs the sense of protectiveness and resentment that sometimes emerges in the text as a product of what Krulak characterizes as a sort of relegation and isolation within the broader American defense scheme. In a sequence

During the 17th century the European powers developed a whole new array of firepower. The old gunpowder weapons that fired by

When one studies a past battle which has similar characteristics to the mission at hand, it enables them to

Napoleon Bonaparte is credited with being a great military tactician as well as a military genius during his era. He played a significant role in world history and the art of war. The man’s genius was fundamentally practical, and all the military concepts he used were attributed to his close study that he did of his earlier commanders, predominantly Fredrick the Great. He did not trust any novel idea and thus by no means used other people’s concepts. He made the fullest utilization of the notions of his predecessors, which he breathed life into them making them successful. Napoleon had to be strategic in order to be victorious in his conquests. The skills, strategies and tactics he used in the battlegrounds were desired and thus copied by many during his era and up today. Warfare especially during the Napoleonic era fundamentally changed modern warfare and continues to be the main reason the military studies Napoleon today. It impacted the battles of today. This essay’s main purpose is to point out the impacts of Napoleon’s warfare strategies and tactics on modern day warfare. It will analyze the principles Napoleon used during his era, and they include the theory of nationalism, creation of the corps’ system and leading disciplined and professional armies.