Slap Believes In Police Warfare
Jeeez....cant leave you guys alone for a minute.:)
As I have said many time Crimes and Wars are caused by people! They are not caused by natural phenomenon like a hurricane or earth quake. So when you analyze the Crime or War you get a list of people and property.....Targets that you can use force against in order to obtain an end to the crime or an end to the war. Choosing (Targeting) which persons or property to use force against is Strategy. And should go from the highest level to the lowest level like CvC said.... there is no level of Strategy, it always present or at least it should. My 2.5 cents anyway.
Seems to me I've heard that song before...
This thread is allied (LINK). :D
I agree with most of that comment. However,
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fuchs
The concept of levels also helps to explain people how the work differs between different levels of the hierarchy. It's helpful because with it we can explain a NCO that strategy is not his job and we can explain a general that interfering in company tactics ain't his either.
this may be what some would wish but fortunately it doesn't work that way in practice. I suggest that you're advocating, in a so-called professional force, that those with 15-20 years experience should not make suggestions to their nominal betters with only three to five years or less experience. Fortunately, the 'system' and humans do not work that way so far as the up the chain aspects. Unfortunately that also holds true on the down the chain aspects... :o
Good NCOs will offer advice and wise Commanders will at least listen to it; poor Generals will try to control Companies, Platoons and Squads. :wry:
That's true due to, as you said:
Quote:
The problems with the levels only arise when people don't invest the brainpower and -time to understand that the limits are not clear-cut, that it's an explanation aid and no mathematically defined nature's law.
That was I, this was thee...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fuchs
I recall someone insisted on the difference between capital and small "o" operations. He attempted to point out how many of today's so-called "operations" are merely minor actions.
I did that and it's on the Thread link I posted above. Also, what you say is not what was the intent. That intent was a tongue in cheek poke at pedantry and excessively serious attention to minor issues... ;)
Etymology is more fun than entomology. :D
This, however, was / is thee:
Quote:
The only way how a squad leader writes true capital "O" operations orders is on a keyboard, typing what an officer ranking major or higher dictates.
That may be true in your experience or even in your Army (though I'm doubtful based on my short but beneficial relationship with the Bundeswehr) but it is emphatically far from true in the US Army and in most others I've worked with. Good units expect their NCOs to come up with their own orders to reflect the Commanders intent, not his diktat. Following your model, the NCO who was Squad Leader but serving as an acting Platoon Leader -- and ALL Armies have those either by design or circumstantially -- would only write orders dictated by a Bn Staff Officer. Doesn't work that way.
Seems to me that anyone who succumbs to the view expressed by you is wasting a LOT of talent... :wry: