What Are The Six Descriptors Defining Our Military Characteristics

John Lynn, on the other hand, tries to conceptualize the relationship between practical dimensions of war and cultural factors. Although he tries to undermine Victor Hanson?s idea of war, he discusses the realities of combat and discourse of war based on social and political

The ways in which the United States has conducted its military operations since becoming an independent nation has largely depended upon the overall political and military objectives of each individual conflict. The United States first three hot wars after the end of World War II display the marked difference in US objectives and the operations used to achieve them better than any other modern wars in which American troops participated.

Carl Von Clausewitz and Helmuth Moltke the Elder were both practitioners and theorists of the war art in the 19th century. Their military thoughts on war’s character and its dynamics have influenced the later militaries in the conduct of war. Particularly, the Clausewitzian concept of the “culminating point of victory” and the Moltke’s principle of “Auftragstaktik”, or mission type tactics by a decentralized command were implemented and culminated in the battlefield of World War II. Moreover, today, the US Army has adopted both concepts in its latest refined “AirLand Battle” doctrine recognizing their importance in the operational art of modern warfare.

The USA was extremely vain when going to war in Vietnam. They had extreme firepower. With a few weeks notice at the time, had the power to turn Vietnam into a region of radioactive glass. The US’s strategy of search and destroy conflicted directly with the Vietnamese’s strategy of hanging onto their belts (caplan,2012). Unlike previous American victories against

Yet, in both of these false dichotomies , Mr. Tierney fails to consider the question: Has America stopped winning wars, or has the definition of what constitutes a strategic victory evolved into something beyond the “valor-studded splendor of American warfare”? This essay will challenge Mr. Tierney’s arguments by showing the social construction of post-World War II definitions of victory by

“War at its basic level has always been about soldiers. Nations rose and fell on the strength of their armies and the men who filled the ranks.” This is a very powerful quote, especially for the yet young country of the United States, for it gives credit where credit is truly due: to the men who carried out the orders from their superiors, gave their blood, sweat and tears, and in millions of cases their lives while fighting for ideals that they believed their country or government was founded upon, and to ensure the continuation of these ideals. Up until the end of the 20th Century, they did so in the worst of conditions, and this includes not only the battle scene, but also every day life. In

The Art of War in the 17th and 18th Centuries is a history course book whose author's are United States Military Academy history instructors Lieutenant Colonel Dave Richard Palmer and Major Albert Sidney Britt III. The textbook gives an insight into the military tactics and the political reasons when they were brought about in the 17th and 18th centuries. The text was published in West Point, New York in 1969. The book contains 9 chapters and 185 pages. There is no additional information on the authors.

First Part: Americans Bullishness Throughout the rest of time, many young Americans will believe, due to movies and US written history, that the United States had won the war against Vietnam. However, to this day, both sides will claim victory in the war. The idea of America's great military losing to an enemy is indefinitely attempted to be blocked out and washed away. The strategy is not meant to lie to the American people but rather sustain the idea and nationalism that if a problem ensues, the US military has the power to defend itself.

In the two hundred years since 1775, there has been thirty-five years of fighting in what we consider major conflicts or wars. This averages out to about one year of war to every almost 6 years of our existence as a nation and during that time, we have not been without formal military organizations. Over the course of history, the United States has engaged in many battles that were a crucial phase in developing who and what we have become. Throughout this assessment, we will analyze what were some of the true tipping points that shaped (1) America’s paradoxical love-hate relationship with war and, (2) How this relationship influences American warfare.

There are no universal theories to explain the true nature and character of war, and any war theories are not a fact or absolute truth. All strategic principles are dynamic and contextual, so “every age had its own kind of war, its own limiting conditions, and its own peculiar preconceptions.” The battlefield environment of the 21st century will be the volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous, and nature of war will be completely different because of the Revolution in Military Affairs. Highly advance communication and information technologies, a dramatic increase in computing capabilities, developed of precision munitions, dominant air and space power ‘war could be waged by the projection of

Five characteristics define the Army as a Profession. These characteristics are honorable service, stewardship of the profession, military expertise, esprit de corps, and trust. According to ADRP 1-0, as a military profession, our relationship with the American people is built on a foundation of trust continuously reinforced by the other four characteristics. Mission accomplishment, reputation, and survivability of the Army are all reliant on trust. Therefore, I believe that trust is the most important characteristic and is the bedrock of the Army’s relationship with the American people.

Clausewitz defines war as an “act of force to compel our enemy to do our will.” The nature of war is enduring yet the character of war changes over time. Current US strategic guidance is advancing the point of view that since the character of war has changed to focus on irregular wars then the US military should prepare for a future of irregular wars. This shift in focus forgets that the nature of war is enduring and in order to be successful, we must prepare for all types of conflict. This paper will define the types of conflict and the likelihood of each followed by a discussion of US strategic guidance and ending with an analysis of the training resources and force structure requirements needed to achieve success for all types of

The notion of an American way of war informs how scholars, policymakers, and strategists understand how Americans fight. A way of war—defined as a society’s cultural preferences for waging war—is not static. Change can occur as a result of important cultural events, often in the form of traumatic experiences or major social transformations. A way of war is therefore the malleable product of culturally significant past experiences. Reflecting several underlying cultural ideals, the current American way of war consists of three primary tenets—the desire for moral clarity, the primacy of technology, and the centrality of scientific management systems—which combine to create a preference for decisive, large-scale conventional wars with clear objectives and an aversion to morally ambiguous low-intensity conflicts that is relevant to planners because it helps them address American strategic vulnerabilities.

The American “way of war” can be seen politically through the evolution of military policy as political perspectives changed. Post-World War II reveals primary and consistent policies that lead American military policymakers to avoid major international conflict. Coined the Cold War, Americans began waging war

A group of strong and honorable individuals that are professionals in the Profession of Arms protects the United States of America. We are professionals because we choose to dedicate our lives to our Nation and its people. All Army professionals meet the Army’s certification criteria of competence, character and commitment. The five essentials characteristics of the Army Profession are trust, military expertise, honorable service, esprit de corps and stewardship of the profession. By having these characteristics and practicing them in our daily lives, we have earned the trust of our leaders, peers, subordinates and the citizens of our nation.