Is The U.S. Army Ready For Conventional War?
-- Christian Science Monitor
-- Christian Science Monitor
Focusing only on counterinsurgency and nation-building is unwise. It must prepare to fight other armies.
Images of Georgian infantry moving under fire and Russian tanks on the attack show that the days of like armies fighting one another on battlefields are far from over.
What does this mean for the US Army? As it considers its role after Iraq, should it be restructured for war and conflict along the lines of counterinsurgency and nation-building, or toward conventional fighting as represented by the Georgian war?
Armies trained to fight conventional warfare can quickly and effectively shift to counterinsurgency and nation-building. Contrary to popular belief, the US Army proved this in Iraq.
Its lightning advance up to Baghdad in the spring of 2003 happened because it was a conventionally minded army, trained for fighting large battles.
If the Army had focused the majority of its time and resources prior to the Iraq war on counterinsurgency and nation-building, the march to Baghdad would have been much more costly in American lives and treasure.
Read more ....
My Comment: The question that should be asked is ..... is there an Army out there that can successfully confront the U.S. Army?
We all know the answer to that question. And fortunately for everyone .... most of the world also knows.