Results 1 to 20 of 143

Thread: Mechanization hurts COIN forces

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #11
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,444

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cavguy View Post
    Okay, then explain 101st performance delta between 2003 and 2005? If not leadership, then what?
    I didn't suggest that it is not leadership. I only pointed out that it is not just the Division Commander's leadership. I suspect that from 2003 to 2005, almost all leadership rotated, from Div down to Plt, along with NCO billets. Also, the operating environment was significantly different, making comparison even more difficult.

    That said, the past few comments have poked some pretty good holes in my original comment. My only hesitation in agreeing is to imagine the role reversal of Odierno and Petreaus. If 4ID units were out of control, I don't see how that could significantly be attributed to the Div Cdr leadership (unless he actually endorsed and supported it). He might have been a minor catalyst, but there are layers of leaders between the General and the Riflemen. Those leaders are not mere relay stations for the orders of the General. A good Div Cdr will have some bad platoons. A bad Div Cdr will have some good platoons. In OIF I, I had a Company Commander who I thought should have been relieved. He was all in favor of doing anything that 4ID was doing, or worse. It was only because the PLs and PSGs did not agree that those things did not occur. Now suppose the opposite were true - good CO and bad Plt leadership. He could not have prevented everything.

    In regard to org culture, not sure if this is a rebuttal or a stream of consciousness, but here goes... Back when we broke down the firewall between 11B and 11M, most NCOs would tell you that going from a light unit to a mech unit, or vice versa, was like entering a different universe. Even now, after that integration, 101 is different from 82 and 3ID is different from 4ID. I've seen Commanders at all levels come and go, but the unit's culture remains. Different cultures will be more or less prone to committing shenanigans and atrocities. Leadership can impact that, but I would argue that it needs to be leadership at all levels. One guy with two stars on his hat? I just don't see it.

    I think Shek is on the right track regarding the different terrain, different task organization, and question of what kind of plan each would have come up with. Choosing a course of action is a small part of leadership.
    Last edited by Schmedlap; 08-27-2009 at 02:27 PM. Reason: Added last para

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •