The Echo of Battle: The Army’s way of War The Echo of Battle: The Army’s way of War, by Brian McCallister Linn; is an informative book that gives understanding on how war has defined the United States, whether it’s the Gettysburg, Iraq or the invisible battle that the military is fighting. United States favorite approach is through weapons and not much skills. However, it also explains that once weapons become silent or when there aren’t as many victories during war, the developing of new strategies becomes a key focus for the United States military. The Army focusing on new strategies and ways could better prepare them for the technology advances in today’s wars against other countries. The attack on 9/11 is the excuse for causing war or …show more content…
As for long as war has been going on in the world the it’s the intuitive for leaders to tell their men to attack and think later, but that has gotten a lot of innocent men and women killed. Therefore, that can be changed by the new leaders of today. As who person who wants to be a leader and go into the potential field of civil affairs I must be able to understand what I am getting into, plus what I can do to make the a change in the way the military works and it’s tactics. I believe that it is truly important that now as evolving leaders that we pay attention to what how the military functions and the wrong decisions that they made as leaders that are leading the military. As before we should be absorbing and preparing ourselves to not make the same mistakes that leaders before us has made. And the fact the book talks a lot about how the military has lost so many times due to strategic planning that has led to defeat. Seeing this now allows future leaders to know how to lead and to not cause casualties’ when it could possibly be prevented. In the book we Linn tells us how American leaders in the military assumed and therefore ended up in the wrong warfare. For example, Linn stated that: “During the Cold War, when many Americans believed they faced nuclear annihilation or communist dictatorship, the dangers posed a century earlier seemed insubstantial” (Linn, 2007). This statement given in the early part of the book represents the entire story is basically the lesson for book that I am able to take with me into my preferred field. Leaders are able to get a sense of learning how to properly manage plans and to understand how to better route situations that lead to less casualties. Which is the main focus of the book the military not being able to have a control of situations therefore making the
Have you ever wondered what has changed within the military in the last 50 years? In her non-fiction book “Drift: The Unmooring of American Military Power,” Rachel Maddow unveils and discusses the major changes in how America now conducts its wars. Specifically, Maddow examines how military powers have been abused by presidents beginning with Lyndon B. Johnson and the Vietnam War to the more recent examples from the Obama administration’s use of private contracts and the CIA. Ms. Maddow’s book is a fascinating expose’ into american militarism and the ideals that America was founded upon.
It is vital that the military uses history to their advantage, whether it is good or bad, in
Book Review 2: Soldiers, Statesmen, and Cold War Crises by Richard Betts Summary: Betts starts off his book by recognizing the ambiguity around the advocacy of the use of force in a crisis by military leaders even though there is a prevalent assumption that military professionals are more aggressive than diplomats and politicians. He states he writes the book in order to provide a comprehensive survey of the postwar role of American military men in decisions on their most essential function, their use of force in combat. Betts acknowledges the vast availability of literature on military participation in decisions on defense budgets and weapons procurement, but feels there is a void when looking at decision-making from the perspective of military leadership versus civilian leadership.
Can an antiquated lens provide an adequate examination and understanding of modern warfare? The theories of Carl von Clausewitz retain remarkable contemporary merit and relevance in explaining the critical elements affecting warfare in the modern era. Carl von Clausewitz’s theories of war endeavor to be comprehendible, comprehensive, and strategic. Clausewitz contends that the conduct of war itself is without doubt very difficult. But the difficulty is not that erudition and great genius are necessary to understand the basic principles of warfare.1 Clausewitz 's 1812 essay, the Principles of War, offers military commanders, with little campaign experience, a comprehendible, comprehensive, and strategic model for attaining victory in battle.
The United States is another large and powerful nation with an extremely strong military supported by its dominant number and quality of aircraft, advanced technology and weaponry, combat hardened troops, unmatched number of aircraft carriers and larger military budget. The spends an extremely large amount of its money on defense. In fact, the United States, “spends more money- $601 billion- on defense than the next nine top spending countries combined. ”(Bender). The US treats defense as an extreme importance by sustaining its large budget and this contributes to its superior military.
Modern wars that the United States have fought in have significantly changed many different aspects of the American people. It has changed how Americans view war and it has helped individual citizens to develop their own opinions on war. Throughout these wars, Americans have witnessed major changes in the uses of our military as well as political viewpoints. There have been many major changes in American wars between the time of the Vietnam War and the War on Terrorism. Although changes may seem gradual, now that many of our major wars have passed, we can look back and discover changes in the uses of our military and in American political viewpoints.
The book ,A Stillness at Appomattox, written by Bruce Catton in 1953, was an enlightening history of the last year of the war as Union general U. S. Grant led the Army of the Potomac against Confederate general Robert E. Lee to finish the American Civil War. Catton vividly describes the plight of the common soldier while keeping the overview of the war in perspective. He effectively creates a mood of misguidance and loss that is felt in more recent conflicts as well as the Civil War. A highly accredited author , Catton creates an effective story that brings the emotions of the front with the motives of the high command.
Through the past 11 years that I have been an enlisted Soldier, I have seen the value of leadership and the effect good and poor leadership can have on Soldiers and
A key component to the success of a military unit is teamwork. Fellow soldiers create bonds that will last for eternity. The following will reveal war as depicted in O’Brien’s, “The Things They Carried”, O’Connor’s, “Guests of the Nation”, Hardy’s, The Man He
Societies in ages past have experienced war at a point in time. Nations that have been in battles have had to use different approaches and tactics depending on their past experiences and objectives. Over the past decades, various approaches to warfare have been employed by various regions the world over. The Western Way of War has been applied in diverse ways to ensure the long-standing dominance of the western nations all over the world. However, the western discipline which is characterised by marching in step, advancing and retreating on a directive and an all-round protection within the rank and file started with the Greek phalanx.
Eisenhower talked about the military and how much it had changed since World War II. “In the councils of the government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex” (Pearson). However, what exactly was the military-industrial complex? “The military-industrial complex refers to any set of relationships between military policy and industrial production” (Ball). General Turgidson’s mind was wired around the military-industrial complex because he believed that once something was done he should finish it and defeat the enemy while limiting collateral
This statement can apply from making a personal decision about buying a house, to deciding whether or not to go to war. While the exact same situation may not occur, history provides a solid case study as to what happened, why it happened, what decisions were made, and what were the results of those decisions. In the case of military commanders, analysis of historical events can lead to better decision making which can save lives, alter battles, and win wars. When leaders make faulty decisions it can result in the failure of a mission and the loss of lives. The Roman army was powerful and had seasoned commanders and soldiers serving throughout its ranks.
I viewed the first two episodes of “The Pacific”. Although they were just the beginning of what I am sure is an otherwise excellent series, I found the videos to be very insightful into the type of warfighting strategies that were used. In traditional wars fought in past years, warfighting strategies were more valiant and civilized. As demonstrated by “The Pacific”, the battles leant towards a guerrilla-warfare strategy. The main reason for this transformation in strategy was because of the new type of enemy that the United States faced.
Furthermore, a study made by Amit et al about leadership-shaping experience found that a group of soldiers who had more leadership experiences were perceived to be leaders compared to those who did not . This points to the fact that exercises in self-development and discipline were key to building leadership qualities. Leaders as mentioned before are role-models in society and when those leadership qualities are nurtured, the society as a whole benefits from them.
Military leadership is the process of influencing others to accomplish the mission by providing purpose, direction, and motivation. Another significant aspect of emphasized by the army is charisma. Therefore, army strategy to have a great leader is to choose people with high charisma since follower are always drawn to leaders with charisma. By having a high charisma they can command the follower easily. The basic task of a leader are: achieve the mission with zero fatality.