3
3
0
An interesting and educational Army perspective on the ways we should think about and prepare for future warfare. Not sure what he means in the last paragraph or so where he suggests moving past constrictive rules of Joint doctrine toward "interdependent command and control." Is he suggesting there wouldn't be a "supported commander" designated by the JFC? How would we prioritize resources against battlefield effects?
Forecasting the Future of Warfare
Posted from warontherocks.com
Strategy
Future
Warfare
Doctrine
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 5
0
0
0
It was a long and enjoyable read, although I don't remember all the salient points. I will go over some things that piqued my interest.
1. It is true we tend to fight the last war. Desert Storm did much harm to us as the coalition army fought a peer on peer army and kicked their ass. It was too easy.
2. The Germans performed a top to bottom, and bottom to top AAR of WWI, while armies around the world relished winning the War to end all wars. This allowed them to be the most prepared for WWII. We were stuck on stationary war, but Germany was developing a doctrine of mobility and the integration of various combat arms.
3. There was no mention of insurgency or the full spectrum of war. When we invaded Afghanistan senior officers were telling us that they "had it in the bag". This is no Vietnam. I am starting to think is it possible for to beat an insurgency backed by the population, committing asymmetrical attacks, and has the ability to blend with the land.
1. It is true we tend to fight the last war. Desert Storm did much harm to us as the coalition army fought a peer on peer army and kicked their ass. It was too easy.
2. The Germans performed a top to bottom, and bottom to top AAR of WWI, while armies around the world relished winning the War to end all wars. This allowed them to be the most prepared for WWII. We were stuck on stationary war, but Germany was developing a doctrine of mobility and the integration of various combat arms.
3. There was no mention of insurgency or the full spectrum of war. When we invaded Afghanistan senior officers were telling us that they "had it in the bag". This is no Vietnam. I am starting to think is it possible for to beat an insurgency backed by the population, committing asymmetrical attacks, and has the ability to blend with the land.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I think IARPA has picked up the reins where DARPA left off in some regards. There are a number of projects that are geared to "seeing into the future". Currently I'm involved with the The Good Judgment Project - Part of IARPA's ACE program - While most of the questions being tasked are geopolitical I can see how this could approach could be used by military analyst in predicting future wars - or at least not get it terrible wrong.
https://www.iarpa.gov/index.php/research-programs|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Good_Judgment_Project
https://www.iarpa.gov/index.php/research-programs|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Good_Judgment_Project
The Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA) invests in high-risk/high-payoff research programs that have the potential to provide our nation with an overwhelming intelligence advantage over future adversaries.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Thank you for the article. I will read it tonight as there is much to synthesize.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google