Tuesday, June 16, 2015

Issue 24

Are carrier groups, traditional fighter wings, and infantry divisions anachronistic or will they remain timeless assets in both conventional and unconventional warfare of the future?
Background Essay
Background Essay

Straying Away From Strength In Numbers

by Thomas Donnellyvia Strategika
Tuesday, June 16, 2015

“God is on the side of the big battalions.” The historical record is opaque about whether it was Napoleon, Turenne, Voltaire, or indeed any identifiable Frenchman who made that statement, but, in this age of supposedly post-industrial warfare, He has apparently changed His mind. Equipped with an iPhone and GPS-guided munitions, God has broken the phalanx, emptied the battlefield, and super-empowered the individual. Mass—particularly the large military formations of the modern era: infantry divisions and corps, aircraft carrier battle groups, tactical air wings—has gone out of style.

Featured Commentary
Poster Collection, UK 2771a, Hoover Institution Archives.
Featured Commentary

Even With Technological Change, Some Things Never Change

by Max Bootvia Strategika
Tuesday, June 16, 2015

The world’s militaries—and especially the most advanced military in the world, that of the United States—are now caught in the vortex of technological change.

Poster Collection, UK 2779, Hoover Institution Archives.
Featured Commentary

Are Carrier Groups, Fighter Wings, And Infantry Divisions Anachronistic In Future Warfare?

by Bing West via Strategika
Tuesday, June 16, 2015

This question, posed by Hoover’s editors, is simply answered: America’s military structure does not need a radical revision. Its traditional assets like carriers and divisions are sound in concept. Indeed, the Pentagon adjusts remarkably. Consider that in 1979, alarmed by Russia’s invasion of Afghanistan, the Pentagon organized the “Rapid Deployment Force” that morphed into the U.S. Central Command in 1981.