Your post brings up a great point. Sustainably relies on many factors. Location, expectations, available assets, and experiences all played a part in your experience in Iraq. Iraq was relatively new to us at that point. It was the initial push. Forecasting and planning were essential in sustaining the force, but very difficult to predict. Expectations versus reality is what we faced. Experience is what we needed. This whole operation was unknown territory. Our Army was encountering a situation we had not seen outside of training in quite a while. Supplies required was an estimated guess, but the biggest problem was most likely logistics. The location was Iraq, a harsh desert, hard on our equipment. The wear and tear was greater than expected requiring more parts than were locally available. We had the need without the way. Experiences and lessons learned can play a huge part in the planning process. Our Army has been at war now for fifteen years. We now have a better idea of supplies that will be required and about the effects of operating our equipment in desert environments. We can better prepare now for the problems that were encountered then. Units are more prepared, and more aware of what will be expected of them. This doesn’t mean it will be easy, but experience can help to reduce the stress of sustainment. This sounds like it definitely was a successful mission. I think part of the reason for this was because of the importance and visibility of the mission and the
Over the course of history, the strategic environment has changed rapidly and is now more complex than ever before – it is currently characterized by unpredictability and disorder, and may yet manifest itself in the collapse of nuclear armed nations, destabilizing conflict in geo-politically vital regions, and humanitarian crises. A world of disparate actors – not all nation states – now exists. Unpredictable events will continue to cause strategic surprise. The widespread effects of past conflicts such as World War II, Vietnam and the Iraq war are still being felt and have created significant strategic repercussions. The failures of these conflicts are the result of our military and political leaders’ failure to quickly adapt to wartime conditions. This occurs because of a general refusal to commit to a military culture of learning that encourages serious debate, critical assessments of our military operations, and challenges to our doctrine in the face of emerging change. Additionally, leaders have struggled with the critical responsibility of forecasting and providing for a ready force, one that is well-resourced and prepared to conduct future operations. It is the responsibility of our military and political leaders to send our military to war with a ready force, and a strategy that will ultimately result in victory. But understanding war and warriors is critical if societies and governments are to make sound judgments concerning military policy.
troops on a hopeless humanitarian mission pulled out of Mogadishu, Somalia. A few Americans realize that during this mission, U.S. troops had the most continuous and gruesome battle fought by American’s since the Vietnam War. The afternoon of October 3rd, 1993, soldiers of Task Force Ranger, and Delta Force were sent to capture two lieutenants of a rebel Somalian warlord and return to base. This mission was supposed to take 30 min, but instead, the soldiers were pinned down in the middle of Mogadishu market and in a desperate effort of kill or be killed. For about 20 hours, U.S. soldiers created a bloody firefight that resulted in 19 American fatalities and the death of 1000 Somali fighters. Black Hawk Down tells the story of that desperate battle, from all angles of the war.
Training objectives must support the mission profile and meet the commanders desired end state. Prior to the 56TH train up at the National Training Center (NTC) the deployment location changed from Iraq to Afghanistan (case study). Changes to mission essential tasks were not identified prior to NTC, resulting in the BCT training on collective tasks and validated during MRE based on the Iraq mission profile. However, the shift to the Afghanistan mission profile created gaps in training not identified until units arrived at Bagram Air Field (BAF). i.e. the BCT had to establish an MRAP drivers training program at BAF extending the RSOI process. Training gaps were not limited to company level shortfalls as battalion and brigade staffs were not able to anticipate potential threats and capitalize on opportunities. (case study 2)
On May 25, 1971, Adams, a major, volunteered to fly a lightly armed helicopter mission to rescue three wounded soldiers from a besieged firebase in the Kontum Province, despite the clear weather which would provide clear visibility for the numerous enemy anti-aircraft around the location. Despite fire from
In 2012, General Dempsey states “Mission Command is fundamentally a learned behavior to be imprinted into the DNA of a profession of arms.” The way Mission Command has evolved through the past years is indicative to the US Military adjusting to a new threat. The concept of Mission Command is not new, what is important is how General Dempsey states “Education in the fundamental principles of mission command must begin at the start of service and be progressively more challenging..” The General emphasizes the need for education at the start of the individual’s service. Additionally, this highlights the United States Army’s doctrinal adjustment to the new threat. During the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the US faced an enemy whose creativity and adaptability are two of its greatest assets. The fast-paced situation changes in both of those AOs required tactical level leadership maintain the autonomy to “exercise disciplined initiative.” This type of initiative historically leads to mission success, specifically in fast-paced situations where a key to success is forcing the enemy to react.
The Ordnance Company of over 200 soldiers was mobilized due to an administrative error when the mission at Fort Lewis only required a platoon size element of 50 soldiers. Right from the start there was a lot of confusion and concern on what exactly the unit would be doing at Fort Lewis and how the excess three fourths of the company would be employed. The unit traveled via commercial air from West Virginia to Seattle, Washington and then shuttled by bus to Fort Lewis where we would spend the next year. When the unit arrived to Fort Lewis the Battalion Commander of the 80th
The U.S military troops had a very hard time trying to find their enemy. One of the worst
Operation Swarmer is one of many important operations/Air-Assault missions in 101st Airborne Division history. I had the pleasure serving in Iraq during this operation OIF lll, and had the pleasure of flying 10-hour days for seven days straight. Even with the long hours and lack of sleep, I feel that we accomplished what we came to do. With me being a young crewmember, I did not fully understand what our mission was, besides flying in troopers to landing zones in the middle of no were. It was not until one of the Infantry Platoon Sergeants asked me if I would like to go with and perform a search. After
The US Central Command’s planning for Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) was not the all-inclusive plan that joint operations require. Joint operations are no longer limited to major combat operations, but encompass a wide range of actions. Planning for joint operations requires input from many sources to produce a successful campaign plan to meet the desired end state. Operational design provides a concept and a construction framework that underpins a campaign and its execution. (JP GL13). Evaluating the planning process by using the operational design identifies some of CENTCOM’s shortfalls. US military planners’ lack of understanding of the operational environment led to an inadequately defined problem that resulted in a faulty operational approach. CENTCOM’s approach did not have the right assessment to gauge the effectiveness of the plan such as alerting planners when and if the plan needed modification. Current joint planning policy incorporates several of CENTCOM’s shortfalls in an attempt to provide a better planning process for future joint operations.
In order to develop effective solutions for complex military problems, the Joint Community within the US Military adopted the methodology of Operational Design in Joint Doctrine. This methodology addresses the concept of complex, ill-structured or “wicked” problems. In fact, Lessons Learned as a result of operations conducted over the last 15 years played an instrumental role in the continued development of this doctrine. Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) illustrates a perfect case study for evaluation utilizing this methodology. Therefore, the intent of this paper is to evaluate US Military campaign planning for OIF by using operational design as the framework for this analysis. First, this paper looks at how planners and commanders interpreted pre-invasion civilian policy guidance, their understanding of the current operational environment, and how these commanders defined the problem. Next, it identifies the strengths and weaknesses of the initial approach. After discussing this initial approach, this paper examines how commanders assessed the campaign and refined the approach – to include how the reframing occurred. Lastly, it provides examples of how these lessons learned shaped current joint planning policy and doctrine.
As stewards of our profession, commanders ensure that military expertise continues to develop and be passed on to aspiring professionals through operational development. It is during this developmental phase that Professional Soldiers put their knowledge and skills to the test. Operational Army units certify and recertify their Professional Soldiers through repetitive and realistic training events including the Combat Life Saver Course, platoon live fires, and exercises at the National Training Center. In the course of these challenging and realistic experiences, the Army’s operational units develop Soldiers and leaders prepared to maintain high standards, discipline, and operational readiness. Operational development and adaptability will continue to drive changes in Army doctrine, organization, leadership, and education as we enter the post-war era. Without this kind of development, the Army could not maintain a well-disciplined professional fighting force.
Soon after, I began to question if a mission was what I wanted to do. I privately looked into all my options and concluded that I mission was in fact a good goal to
In conclusion, this mission is said to be one of the best missions ever because of a lot of
Two variables that I will discuss are social and physical environment. It is very easy as a military today to look back at Iraq and Afghanistan and see the glaring mistakes we made and how they could have been
As seen through today’s prism of operational art and design, the U.S. military’s campaign planning for Operation IRAQI FREEDOM (OIF) was not successful. This failure resulted from flaws in the planning process itself, and the conclusions that flowed from that process. The lack of adequate advance planning for Phase IV stability or transition operations proved especially problematic. This contributed directly to rising levels of violence in Iraq, and indirectly to increased public scrutiny of the war at home. Throughout 2006, the U.S. public, pundits and military planners debated the way forward in Iraq. The plan that emerged from this period, known as the surge, successfully overcame the deficiencies in the initial planning and execution