22 September, 2008
Bacevich Article
I completely agree with what Frank wrote in his email, especially in regards to the need for adaptability. Developing adaptability, especially in the officer corps, is the only way to ensure that the Army will be prepared for the next war--whatever it may be. I do think that there is merit to the argument that the pendulum has swung too far towards stability ops and away from conventional warfighting capabilities, but COL Gentile's argument about whether this is even the Army's choice to make only underscores the importance of adaptability. Politicians come and go, but the Army--with its institutions, people, and culture--will remain. We need to be ready to confront whatever threat may appear because we have no way of knowing what future presidents will see our next threat as.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Going along with what Frank mentioned in his email, I find it really interesting that "Learning to Eat Soup with a Knife" is regarded primarily as a book on counterinsurgency when it is actually focused on institutional learning as exemplified in two COIN situations.
There is a lot to be learned from Nagl's book about COIN, but the fact that people are missing the books adaptibility message gives weight to Franks arguement about learning and adaptation and is an example of what is happening in the Army and defense community as a whole. From both this book, and the happenings of the last 5 years, we are taking away the smaller lessons learned (how to fight an insurgency) while missing the more significant message about institutional adaptation and learning that will allow the Army to be a stronger fighting force, regardless or whether we are facing an insurgency or conventional force.
(Yes, this is what I'm doing with my time as a GBR).
Post a Comment