Transformation Under Fire: Revolutionizing How America Fights By
Col. Douglas A. MacGregor, PFL (pre-fontal lobotomy)
OR
How to Kiss (Rumsfeld’s) Ass with Verbosity and Avoid Reality
A former co-worker thought I would be interested in reading MacGregor’s book as the author is touted as an “outside-the-box” thinker and a “loose cannon” by the establishment (a moniker I’ve shared during my career). Nothing was further from the truth. The author doesn’t really think outside the box (many of his ideas have been proffered previously by other highly paid consultants/star wars military “intelligentsia.” He also assumes the U.S. military will be OPCON’d to the U.N. as part of a “global force.” I am unalterably opposed to THAT having been subjected to that institution’s political corruption and idiotic rules of engagement in Mogadishu in October, 1993. The below are statements by the author and my cynical responses.
Q. “Are we prepared to meet the challenges of the next war?” (Of course! The definition of “victory” will be mutated to guarantee success.
Q. “What should our military look like?” (Whatever costs the most)
“Stuck with a force structure that hasn’t changed since WWII” ???? How about the AirLandBattle Doctrine of the ‘90s downsizing divisions to combat brigades?
“Without a conceptual redefinition of warfare as “Joint” operation, a new military culture that can execute joint expeditionary warfare will not emerge.” Goldwater/Nichols Act in 198? requiring “Jointness” after Desert One and Grenada.
“MacGregor’s visionary (?) plan to integrate ground maneuver forces with powerful strike assets is the foundation for a true revolution in military affairs, ….” (inside flap of cover) This repeats AirLandBattle Doctrine?
“This practical and human, as opposed to technically based, approach to force development or transformation is is important…” (Foreword, xvi)
P.1: “War does for armies what the marketplace does for business. Combat accelerates change by moving it out of the realm of the academic debate and endless speculation and into a pragmatic approach focused on fielding new capabilities within new combat formations. !!!??? [….into the hands of defense contractors.(my insertion)]
A. War IS business! See NetFlix video “Why We Fight.” which begins with the video of President Eisenhower’s farewell speech to the nation warning us of the military-industrial complex and documents both public and private agreements with the royal Saudi family to ensure a steady supply of oil –to include an apparent agreement to look the other way and let the Saudi family “deal” with Osama bin Ladin (a godson to King Faisal) “in their own way”.
P. 1: “With the disappearance of conscript armies in the Western or globalized world (a subtle surrender of our armed forces to global authority?) the requirement is for highly skilled military professionals who are capable of rapidly responding to a very wide range of military contingencies on short notice.” (New World Order? “skilled” pros? The educational trend is just the opposite exacerbated by congress’ insistence on making the military mirror society (see “SAT to be simplified”) So, while the mil-industrial complex continues to (Sir Robert K. Thompson, world’s premier COIN expert left RVN in disgust when Westmoreland refused to listen to him – and anyone else who wasn’t conventionally minded.
P3: “The much more important question posed by the Information Age is how to organize army capabilities effectively to provide the joint force with needed ground components.” (Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College has addressed this repeatedly. –[List them]
“Joint Expeditionary Operations” (sounds like colonialism to me)
Chpt III: “The people’s whose lives depended upon the old structures are seeing their worlds destroyed4 Though America does not deserve all the credit for this condition, it does tend to get most of the blame, which draws the U.S. Army into new forms of combat around the world.” !!!because we are exporting democracy and shattering cultures THAT draws us into worldwide combat?
Ch.IV: “Effects-based” this concept was overruled by a general with “one more star” than the proposing general. -2008. McNamara’s “Zero Defects” reducted?
This book proves the more things change the more things stay the same. (see movie Pentagon Wars). I had to stop reading this rehash of “transformational” ideas before I vomited. In the ‘90s I subscribed to the U.S. War College’s Strategic Studies Institute for their innovative ideas on the military (“The Military-Technological Revolution [MTR], etc.) and I paid attention to what army planners were publishing in other seminal documents. Apparently so has the author. Like traffic cops at an accident – “Keep moving. There’s nothing to see here.”
