LESSON OBJECTIVES:

501.1 Comprehend war theory.

501.11 Explain the relationship between military history and war theory.

Military History

• History is the foundation of knowledge needed to build war theory. It provides practical examples from which to base theory.
• (Hawke) If one is willing to spend time mastering the military profession, studying successful commanders, learning to think complexly and understanding the nature of man, one is likely to have an advantage in war. In the study of history, there can be clues and even limited answers, but mostly, it teaches one how to think and consider all the variables. A commander who can master his circumstances will be more likely to succeed in war and in peace.

War Theory

• (Athens) A set of beliefs based on observation Experience). Framework Which permits the accurate assessment of military situations and enhances decision-making. Athens emphasizes Clausewitz's warning that theory is descriptive not prescriptive. Commanders must not attempt to apply it dogmatically to battlefield situations.
• Three purposes of theory. (Clausewitz in Athens reading) (1) Basis for Historical study - so that you don't have to start each time something comes up. (2) To train the Command(er's) mind - the intellectual foundation upon which thinking about the profession of arms is accomplished. (3) A means of clarifying the "Normal" pattern of war - it attempts to "clarify concepts and ideas that have become confused and entangled" which will help commanders identify when something is off the beaten track. It identifies the starting point for adjustments.
• (Winton) It is a systematic statement of principles or propositions related military study. (Defines, Categorizes, Explains, Connects and Anticipates)

Notes (Based mainly on the Hawke reading)

There are a great number of past leaders who used history to help guide them. (Napoleon - 1809 - approved the use of pontoon bridges because Marshal Maurice de Saxe had used them in 1740) The list is long, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Churchill, Eisenhower, MacArthur, Kennedy, etc.

Some things to remember about history. (1) History is a means rather than an end. (2) One must sift to find a balanced picture - BIAS is there. (3) History is not a substitute for learning how to think - it is not a playbook. (4) The motives and character of the participants must be understood. (5) The latest military history provides the best examples from which to draw - but not the only. (6) Don't force examples to fit the theory or plan. (7) Never take historical events out of context, you have to know the who, what, when, where and why as well as the how.

501.12 Explain the relationship between war theory and doctrine.

Short Answer: (Athens) Doctrine puts theory into practice.

(Athens) Analogy - Theory is the computer's operating system and doctrine is the application software. Theory is in the background (invisible) while doctrine is what you are executing right now.

(Howard) Everyone plans for the last war. So No one will get doctrine right in peacetime. Victory will go to the side whose theoretical foundation is sound enough that his doctrine is least wrong and can be readily adapted.

501.13 Explain how theory and principles of war apply at the operational level of war.

(Athens) Understanding theory and the patterns of war gives the battlefield commander a broader perspective and understanding of war. This enhanced understanding of war will allow the commander to rapidly exercise sound judgement under stressful, uncertain combat conditions.

The two examples used are; T.E. Lawrence and Mao. Both used a sound theoretical base to adapt to their situations. They both pointed out that theory can only be adapted when a commander pays particular attention to the specific circumstances surrounding the conflict at hand.

Two lessons:

(1) Military theory should never be viewed as cast in stone.
(2) Adapting theory requires a flexible mind.

501.14 Discuss the functions of war theory as presented in the Winton reading.

(Winton) Winton talks about war theory as being a series of codified, systemic propositions related to the field of study. It ideally:

1. Defines the field, which provides the necessary focus to the study of war.
2. Categorizes warfare into subordinate parts, thereby distinguishing between ideas that first appear fused.
3. Explains the relationship between the different parts. The if - then stuff.
4. Connects warfare to other non-war phenomena because war does not happen in a vacuum.
5. Anticipates new relationships. (Tries to be predictive)
   

501.15 Explain why military culture is resistant to revolutionary change.

(Howard) He talks of the "peacetime" versus "an age of peace" comparison to get it started. He points out that they are different because peacetime is when you are getting ready for war and an age of peace is when you don't think war 9at least total war) is likely anytime soon. He says that Nuclear weapons make this an age of peace. This age of peace is the underlying foundation of the difficulties in revolutionary change. He points out a number of reasons for resistance.

1. You cannot verify whether the idea is correct. Scientific elements can be validated, but ideas cannot always be verified until the next war.
2. The bureaucracy is large, slow and defensive. It does not adapt well to change.
3. Change is the result of teamwork and consensus building. This slow.
4. The military is hierarchical and emphasizes conformity. This makes it tough for the new guy with the new idea.
5. Change usually means that someone will lose his or her rice bowl. This is powerful stuff. There are people and entire corporations that are dedicated to defending their piece of the pie. And don't forget Congress.