Agreed. His first 5 answers are excellent. In response 6, I think he pushes the oil angle too far but that is a question of degree. At the same time he is quite correct in saying the Middle East is a turbulent arena and long term forecasts are SWAGs at best.Originally Posted by SteveMetz
Best
Tom
It's that high quality CGSC education at work. (A few others that I didn't mess up were Russ Honore, Dan Bolger, and Pete Leahy--now Chief of Army in Oz).
hmmmm and I did not make the list....
Well, no one bats 1.000.hmmmm and I did not make the list....
Don't know the other two but unless Russ
changed a great deal after he made MAJ, he was virtually unmessable...
True story. He was having a bit of difficulty getting counterinsurgency, so I really had to work with him. Finally it clicked and he gave a pretty good presentation. I was commending him and someone in the back of the room piped up, "You know sir, you just took a perfectly good tanker and dicked him up."changed a great deal after he made MAJ, he was virtually unmessable...
Heh. We worked together at Knox for about
a year before I left for another job. He'd wrestle with some concepts but he wouldn't quit 'til he got 'em locked. I kept meaning to run up to Atlanta to see him while he was at First Army; put it off too long.
He was the Ragin' Cajun a long time before Carville got that tag...
I dont know if anybody here ever saw it but there was an Air Power book review where MacGregor was called the Army's Colonel Warden. I will have to see if I can find the review but in general the Air Force likes this guy. I have never read any of his books just a few articles but I guess I will have to change that. Has anybody on SWC read his books or have any comments about his transformation ideas?
I've read his books and found a great deal of it interesting. I think one reason the AF might like him is that he was arguing for a smaller Army in some ways...or at least smaller basic units. He's also very tech-driven, which of course they can empathize with. He's worth the read when you get the chance, but keep in mind that he's focusing mostly on larger, conventional conflicts with a great deal of what he says. There are some comments about his proposals for Iraq in Corba II that aren't exactly flattering, if memory serves.
I have good memories of what he did with 1/4 Cav when he was with the 1st ID, at least from a unit pride/history standpoint. I'd assume he was a decent commander as well, since I don't recall hearing any major whining when I was working at Ft Riley. Of course, he was in Germany at the time but word does tend to travel....
"On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War
Hi Slap,
I've read Transformation Under Fire and it's worth the read. It expands on his first book Breaking the Phalanx. Last time I checked the book was on the CSA Reading List. Many of his transformation ideas have been considered and some adopted in part. His big theme is having RCTs (larger than current BCTs) and headed by a BG. Hope that helps.
Best--
Kreker
Breaking the Phalanx was written when Doug was doing a senior service college fellowship (the equivalent of war college) at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. It was one of the things that helped prep the battlefield for the Army's modularity concept. I don't think Doug invented modularity any more than John Warden invented effects based operations, but both are very bright and powerful, articulate writers who helped popularize the ideas. (Doug is a UVA Ph.D.)
As indicated above, he does tend to focus at the operational and tactical level rather than the strategic. So the question is still open as to whether what the nation needs is an Army focused on fast, flexible conventional warfighting.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks