- Joined
- Dec 28, 2008
- Location
- Pennsylvania
Staff ride materials are available on line.
http://www.history.army.mil/srides.html
Thanks!
Staff ride materials are available on line.
http://www.history.army.mil/srides.html
Hah! You got the rain we had yesterday. Deedle deedle.
Antebellum West Point was more a school of practical military engineering than one of modern military studies concentrating on theoretical strategy and tactics; emphasis was more on the School of the Soldier ( parade-ground drill ), gunnery ( artillery drill ) and equition ( horsemanship ) than anything cerebral. The motivating force was Professor Dennis Hart Mahan who stressed the writings of the Swiss Baron Antoine Henri Jomini for what military theory was taught. Jomini lived during the Napoleonic Wars and served as Chief-of-Staff to Marshal Michel Ney until 1813 when he saw the "handwriting on the wall", and changed sides, bringing to the Coalition arrayed against the Emperor a great deal of knowledge about his methods of warfare.
Being a Swiss mercenary and professional soldier, Jomini was convinced of the superiority of Napoleon's methods and even after Waterloo continued to advance them. His writings in French, then the international language, were published in 1836 had much wider circulation than Clausewitz' German texts, especially in Western Europe and the Americas. That's one reason for the continuing popularity of Napoleon and the French army during the 1860's. Jomini continued to serve in the Russian army and lived until 1869!
As a general rule, I think the CW should not be judged by future writings of the military art.
Just to clear up any confusion before it occurs, while Clausewitz did write an essay called "The Principles of War," where he elucidated some of his principles, the nine Principles of War used by today's military [MOOSEMUSS] were adapted from the principles first formulated by J. F. C. Fuller. A modern military staff ride would use those principles instead of the Clausewitzean principles.
When I was a First Sergeant of a Headquarters and Headquarters Company, one of the hardest things I had to see to was making sure the officers of my company did NOT help in the setting up of tents, laying out the camp, and helping to set up camouflage netting over our vehicles and battalion tactical operations center (TOC).
The officers, in my view, were trying to be 'one of the guys' or to be thought of as 'good guys' pitching in and helping the privates with their details. I flat out discouraged this EVERY time I saw an officer start to pitch in and help with soldier chores. The plain fact of the matter was, this is not an officers job, to pound tent pegs or lug gas cans for the generators to power up radios and such.
I often had to make officers go to the front of the chow line when we were in the field, making sure they ate first, before any of our privates or sergeants did. I would find the battalion staff going to the end of the line, not wanting to 'cut' in front of soldiers who were already in line. I would walk up to them and make them go to the front of the line so they could eat first.
Was I being a suck-up? Did I hate my soldiers? No, in both cases.
The job of officers is to look beyond the day-to-day functions and chores of military life and PLAN for tomorrow, to plan where the gas, bullets, bandages, food and water were to come from and ensure it made its way to the company. It was their job to PLAN on how to respond to suspected enemy moves and attacks, to set up defensive positions, listening posts, establish contact with units in the rear and on each flank. They had enormous responsibilities that often kept them up long hours with little rest. They HAD to get fed, they HAD to be kept from doing the little details so they could concentrate on the BIG picture. Whenever I saw officers 'pitching in to help' I got angry and upset. Being a good officer is not being in any kind of popularity contest or getting your soldiers to 'like' you. The old saying is, "Familarity breeds contempt" is exactly correct when it comes to officer/soldier relations.
We had our battalion staff go on a few battlefield rides when I was stationed at Ft. Drum, New York, and I always supported them doing so. The more the lesson of a past battle, the features of that battlefield, the tactics and mistakes that took place on it, seemed to force them to realize the big picture of what their actual jobs were.
And it sure as heck made my job a lot easier.
Sincerely,
Unionblue
When I was a First Sergeant of a Headquarters and Headquarters Company, one of the hardest things I had to see to was making sure the officers of my company did NOT help in the setting up of tents, laying out the camp, and helping to set up camouflage netting over our vehicles and battalion tactical operations center (TOC).
The officers, in my view, were trying to be 'one of the guys' or to be thought of as 'good guys' pitching in and helping the privates with their details. I flat out discouraged this EVERY time I saw an officer start to pitch in and help with soldier chores. The plain fact of the matter was, this is not an officers job, to pound tent pegs or lug gas cans for the generators to power up radios and such.
I often had to make officers go to the front of the chow line when we were in the field, making sure they ate first, before any of our privates or sergeants did. I would find the battalion staff going to the end of the line, not wanting to 'cut' in front of soldiers who were already in line. I would walk up to them and make them go to the front of the line so they could eat first.
Was I being a suck-up? Did I hate my soldiers? No, in both cases.
The job of officers is to look beyond the day-to-day functions and chores of military life and PLAN for tomorrow, to plan where the gas, bullets, bandages, food and water were to come from and ensure it made its way to the company. It was their job to PLAN on how to respond to suspected enemy moves and attacks, to set up defensive positions, listening posts, establish contact with units in the rear and on each flank. They had enormous responsibilities that often kept them up long hours with little rest. They HAD to get fed, they HAD to be kept from doing the little details so they could concentrate on the BIG picture. Whenever I saw officers 'pitching in to help' I got angry and upset. Being a good officer is not being in any kind of popularity contest or getting your soldiers to 'like' you. The old saying is, "Familarity breeds contempt" is exactly correct when it comes to officer/soldier relations.
We had our battalion staff go on a few battlefield rides when I was stationed at Ft. Drum, New York, and I always supported them doing so. The more the lesson of a past battle, the features of that battlefield, the tactics and mistakes that took place on it, seemed to force them to realize the big picture of what their actual jobs were.
And it sure as heck made my job a lot easier.
Sincerely,
Unionblue
Military "Staff Rides" are held on many Military Parks with one group being the North and one the South. They go over what, when, where and why things were done, what could have been done differently and what lessons for today's military can be brought away from the actions that took place on those fields150 years ago.