Watching the news coverage of the Iraq invasion has opened my eyes to (very obvious) things that I had never really thought about before:
- Who determines the tactical objectives and plans that are needed to accomplish the overriding military objectives? How are they disseminated and integrated among all the different participating forces and units?
- so, for example, if the goal is to “secure” Basra, there must be intelligence, target selection, target allocation (who gets to blow up what), preparation and equipping and selection of forces, transportation of these forces to the theatre, preparation and coordingation of tactical objectives, etc, etc
- I am particularly interested in what type of decisions/plans are made at the “local” (?batallion ?company) level and what type are made at a much higher level, say by a general.
- How are the myriad components of the invading force integrated to mesh smoothly (i.e. the integration of all the various battle “sub-plans”, infrastructure support at both the “local” and “corps” level - including fuel and supplies - internal security, ongoing communication, dynamic near-real-time feedback, special forces coordination, etc.)
2a. When one particular tactical objective requires combined air, naval, and ground forces, how does the chain of command work and how are the tactics of each coordinated? Who makes the decision in the first place that multiple branches can/should be used for this particular objective?
Perhaps, these are the types of things that are covered at “war college”. Indeed, I’m pretty sure there are no simple answers to my questions, but I’d appreciate your insights. I am truly awed at how all this is being pulled off without apparent hitches (especially when I think of the huge hassles I have in organizing and coordinating plans and people that are many orders of magnitude smaller than the invasion).
