Roadside Bombs & IEDs (catch all)

[Pragmatic Thinker]

I'd also suggest that our failure to provide unity of command is a big disruptor of any effort toward coherence. The Prez says what he wants, that's strategy. DoD says do what the boss wants, the Army and the Corps generate forces and then CentCom sits in Tampa and decides who goes where with apparently little rhyme or reason and MNF-I gets to implement the resultant mess. For that kettle of worms, you can blame Goldwater-Nichols and the Congress. The Admin, DoD, CentCom and MNF-I can't really change that (well CentCom could -- but they won't)


I am in violent agreement with you regarding CENTCOM, history will not speak well of it's post-invasion management of this conflict. I can't go into too many details due to my proximity to the problem but the lack of doctrinal structure (look at the joint doctrine and then compare it to how the C2 is structured in theater) and some of the bafoonery that goes into the decisions of force disposition are absolutely criminal. The Army will also not fair well in the Iraqi rearview mirror. Modularity and the piece-mealing of units together without consideration of cohesion and unity of command is also to blame for the confusing picture on the ground. When a BCT enters into its 12 month pre-deployment train-up with its organic battalions this should be the force it fights with for 15 months. Also, with the BCT's having numerous rotations into theater you would assume it makes sense to return them to the same AOR to maximize unit familiarity with the populace, enemy, and terrain but that doesn't happen either. All too often you see a BCT train-up to go to area X, only to be told while in Kuwait waiting to enter the box that they are going somewhere else, and that two of their organic battalions will go somewhere else and they will inherit two battalions from a different BCT... I am no Patton or McArthur but that doesn't make sense to me. I am miffed as to how we justify this and expect effectiveness not to suffer?!?

True and another's on the way -- That's not a strategy effect; has nothing what so ever to do with strategy. That's a DoD typical reaction to a problem; throw money at it and try for a technological fix instead of training people and just getting on with the job. I spent 45 years in and around DoD, it was that way the whole time and in the 12 years I've been retired, nothing has changed. I agree with you sir...very sad indeed... Thanks for your response and candor.

PT

[Ken White]

...
I am in violent agreement with you regarding CENTCOM, history will not speak well of it's post-invasion management of this conflict.... The Army will also not fair well in the Iraqi rearview mirror...

Edit: Uh, that would be protraCtion contRibutors. Hey. lee me loan, I'm old

Both true. Good news is the Army knows it and is working on fixing at least part of it. Bad news is that CentCom knows it and they and DoD don't care due to the 'joint' factor, the aforementioned B-N act and the rotation of round pegs into the square hole that is CinCCent every two or three years....

Poor way to do business.

Modularity and the piece-mealing of units together without consideration of cohesion and unity of command is also to blame for the confusing picture on the ground. When a BCT enters into its 12 month pre-deployment train-up with its organic battalions this should be the force it fights with for 15 months. Also, with the BCT's having numerous rotations into theater you would assume it makes sense to return them to the same AOR to maximize unit familiarity with the populace, enemy, and terrain but that doesn't happen either. All too often you see a BCT train-up to go to area X, only to be told while in Kuwait waiting to enter the box that they are going somewhere else, and that two of their organic battalions will go somewhere else and they will inherit two battalions from a different BCT... I am no Patton or McArthur but that doesn't make sense to me. I am miffed as to how we justify this and expect effectiveness not to suffer?!?

Thee, me and a couple of commanders I know. I cannot understand why DA tolerates it, I cannot understand why CentCom and the MNF-I do it (both, as I understand it have a hand in it) nor do I understand why Commanders are not raising the roof about it.

It also affects Afghanistan.

Rotation of units for seven months or a year (or more) is far, far better than individual rotation -- but just 'cause it's better, is no reason to try to undo the good effect it can have. Sad.