I trust the inner quotation above summarizes the two conclusions you plan to draw from this analysis, not your thesis. By the way, without a significant amount of new argument, I do not see how you can infer your second, normative (should create . . .) conclusion from your first, descriptive one. I'm also interested in seeing what kind of premises you intend to marshal to show that the Army needs a "tactical decision simuilator" to train "officers at all echelons." Why do folks working at higher echelons, where they should be doing stuff at the operational and strategic levels, need training in tactical decison making? Ojne last point--no decision is objective IMHO. Each varies depending on the character of the decider and all the aspects of METT-TC knownto and/or understood by the decider at the time of the decision.
Good luck. But you seem to have predetermined your conclusion.
Bookmarks