David Gonzales and Sgt. Michael Bandy and Command Sgt. Photo courtesy of 2nd Lt.
Download the PDF Col. Ross Coffman, 1st Brigade, 1st Armored Division brigade commander seated, left centerhis brigade staff, and battalion commanders listen to an intelligence brief during the Leader Training Program at the National Training Center 22 January Army photo by Capt.
All military professionals should answer this question in the affirmative, but, sadly, this is not the case. Utility is the only criterion necessary for relevancy.
Utility is defined here as an ability to contribute to planning by improving understanding, focusing planning, and improving efficiency. The fact that criticism exists indicates the existing doctrine has some rough edges and needs revision.
The following are two examples that fuel the criticism and illustrate the importance of settling the COG concept so that its utility is realized rather than obfuscated. During Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, a lack of common and well-developed COG definitions resulted in poor unity of effort and synchronization.
Norman Schwarzkopf selected three centers of gravity rather than focus on one. Both services considered the weapons of mass destruction COG necessary, albeit a distraction. George Casey to misidentify the true COG. Planners briefed him on two centers of gravity: One planner, using a then-current doctrinal method, recommended the Iraqi government.
I proposed the population as the COG.
Casey selected the Iraqi government as the COG. Months later in the insurgency rose to new levels of violence. David Petraeus took command and implemented a population-centric counterinsurgency strategy. His strategy saw significant elements of the population turn against the insurgents, resulting in coalition and Iraqi security forces rolling back the insurgency.
These critics exist throughout the force and run from junior to senior leadership. They are in the headquarters and military schools and therefore have tremendous influence on the application or misapplication of the concept.
Addressing their criticisms is critically important to resolving the not fully realized utility of the concept. To persuade military planners that the concept is relevant, we first need to understand the objections.Army Regulation –1 Field Organizations Unit Status Reporting Headquarters Department of the Army Washington, DC 19 December UNCLASSIFIED.
SUMMARY of CHANGE report a special T-level while deployed, while subordinate elements are deployed, or following deployments (chap 11). Over view Next, you will identify elements of structure inherent to Army writing - Passive voice Army writing introduction.
The structure of Army writing is simple and consists of two elements: the first, “begin with the main idea,” and the second, “packaging.” Begin with the Main Idea We will write a custom essay sample on.
Army Regulation – Personnel Evaluation Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Reporting System “Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Reporting System.” in writing, to a d i v i s i o n c h i e f w i t h i n t h e p r o p o n e n t.
Dec 19, · The Army is effective only if information and directions are clearly communicated.
In carrying out your military duties, you will write various types of correspondence. This student guide will help you become an effective Army writer.
Before writing the Fully Successful standard, you must know the number of levels that your appraisal program uses to appraise elements.
For example, if you are under an appraisal program that uses two levels to appraise elements, the Fully Successful standard would describe a single point of performance, above which is Fully Successful, and. MACOMs and Army elements of the Joint Staff and who are supported by the local PPA (PERSINS Processing Activity), will cooperate with the local commander to ensure accurate personnel accounting and strength reporting for their units.