This is a well organized and thought-out document, and to me does a good job of outlining the current threats and complex operational environment. To me, two things stood out: 1) the fact that the mission of the DoD, first and foremost, is to deter war and protect the security of our nation. We train so that we are ready to fight and win, but that training and preparation also serve as a deterrence to foreign/terrorist aggression at the same time. 2) Somewhat related to this fact is that our actions both internally and with allies must challenge competitors and strategically maneuver them into unfavorable positions. Every ODT mission in which we participate is really a strategic engagement to this end. The more ready we are for war, the stronger our strategic position in the world to deter aggression through all of the elements of national power. Without a credible military threat, the other elements of national power are not effective, because they do not come from a position of strength.
As was mentioned by CSM Nelson, this was a well organized document that was blunt, to the point, and explains what we must do to win or compete. The scary thing that stuck out to me is failure to meet our defensive objectives will result in decreasing US global influence, eroding cohesion among allies and partners, and reduced access to markets that will contribute to a decline in our prosperity and standard of living. For decades the US was dominant at every level, today, we are contested in every area. We have never seen an adversary like we are seeing now and we must be trained and ready as soon as we can. It made me think that we can't wait, we can't procrastinate, we have to be ready yesterday.
The emphasis on building the Joint Force really stands out to me because it represents many potential opportunities, and challenges, to us as National Guardsmen all the way down to the individual level. I have noticed an uptake in Soldiers returning from deployments and talking about the Joint Environments in which they found themselves operating.
All of this raised this question: If sustaining Joint Force military advantages is the second objective described in this article, what is NGB, and more specifically, the 300th doing to prepare our Soldiers for those environments? Being ready to deploy as a unit is important, and Objective-T is a great goal to strive for. But after reading this NDS, I think we need to reach farther, push harder, and create training environments that will more closely mimic what our Soldiers are experiencing downrange.
I think the most significant section of this entire article was, Cultivate workforce talent. The strength of our military is in the American people. The specific topics touched on are Professional Military Education, Talent management and Civilian workforce experiences. This is an arena where the National Guard shines and needs to continue to shine. However, it is extremely difficult to maintain relevancy in both the civilian workforce, aka my daily bread, and the military workforce. It's definitely a commitment and sacrifice to staying relevant and promoting in both. How are the behemoth active duty components going to raise a military that can compete with the same level of relevancy? The National Guard and reservists combined don't have enough resources to do take on all the things pointed out in this article. Talent management needs to be a much broader subject that the small paragraph in this article. To stay relevant with our enemies, we must restructure our recruiting efforts to pull from the civilian workforce that has experience in the technical arenas. Additionally, we need to restructure our retention efforts. Many people in the tech world with the skills necessary to the strategic defense of our nation cannot/will not pass military standardized (catch-all) tests. Not just physical fitness tests, but also mental and health tests and military social customs. It's just not going to happen. The talent we need do not ascribe to the military thinking. On a general level, the U.S. military recruits and trains killers, not programmers, coders and thinkers. We contract all of the work requiring technical occupational skills mentioned in the article. To start recruiting and retaining that type of talent, the DOD will need a complete overhaul to it's "military life".
The article presents some real challenges for the National Guard and the MI community in particular. As the DOD changes focus from what has been primarily a COIN environment in order to prepare for a peer to peer conflict or hybrid threat, our training will need to change as well. Our challenge as leaders will need to be how we can best utilize our very limited time and resources for the best results especially when most of our SMs will continue to be most likely deployed as individuals or small teams and their training does not fit nicely within the typical ARFOGEN cycle that the maneuver elements have to train. I believe this begins during ATMS with reevaluating our MEDEL and drilling in on the most relevant tasks that offer our SMs the ability to adapt quickly and to think creatively in order to stay in step or ideally a step ahead of an ever changing threat.
Three things really stand out to me in the 2018 NDS. 1) The focus of the document is on near-peer State actors. This is a real departure from past strategies and highlights the sources of our most pressing threats. 2) The concept that the U.S. will be "strategically predictable, but operationally unpredictable". This statement should put our adversaries on notice that the status quo can and will change. Just because we're not defending or deterring an adversary today in a certain region or realm doesn't mean we won't be there tomorrow. 3) Prioritize preparedness for war. I love the statement "Achieving peace through strength requires the Joint Force to deter conflict through preparedness for war." This highlights exactly what I feel we're doing at the unit level. Adversaries resort to force when they believe they can beat us in a fight. We have to ensure adversaries know that our preparedness, capability, and will to act will always give us the upper hand in any fight. This will always be our challenge.
This is a well organized and thought-out document, and to me does a good job of outlining the current threats and complex operational environment. To me, two things stood out: 1) the fact that the mission of the DoD, first and foremost, is to deter war and protect the security of our nation. We train so that we are ready to fight and win, but that training and preparation also serve as a deterrence to foreign/terrorist aggression at the same time. 2) Somewhat related to this fact is that our actions both internally and with allies must challenge competitors and strategically maneuver them into unfavorable positions. Every ODT mission in which we participate is really a strategic engagement to this end. The more ready we are for war, the stronger our strategic position in the world to deter aggression through all of the elements of national power. Without a credible military threat, the other elements of national power are not effective, because they do not come from a position of strength.
ReplyDeleteAs was mentioned by CSM Nelson, this was a well organized document that was blunt, to the point, and explains what we must do to win or compete. The scary thing that stuck out to me is failure to meet our defensive objectives will result in decreasing US global influence, eroding cohesion among allies and partners, and reduced access to markets that will contribute to a decline in our prosperity and standard of living. For decades the US was dominant at every level, today, we are contested in every area. We have never seen an adversary like we are seeing now and we must be trained and ready as soon as we can. It made me think that we can't wait, we can't procrastinate, we have to be ready yesterday.
ReplyDeleteThe emphasis on building the Joint Force really stands out to me because it represents many potential opportunities, and challenges, to us as National Guardsmen all the way down to the individual level. I have noticed an uptake in Soldiers returning from deployments and talking about the Joint Environments in which they found themselves operating.
ReplyDeleteAll of this raised this question: If sustaining Joint Force military advantages is the second objective described in this article, what is NGB, and more specifically, the 300th doing to prepare our Soldiers for those environments? Being ready to deploy as a unit is important, and Objective-T is a great goal to strive for. But after reading this NDS, I think we need to reach farther, push harder, and create training environments that will more closely mimic what our Soldiers are experiencing downrange.
I think the most significant section of this entire article was, Cultivate workforce talent. The strength of our military is in the American people. The specific topics touched on are Professional Military Education, Talent management and Civilian workforce experiences. This is an arena where the National Guard shines and needs to continue to shine. However, it is extremely difficult to maintain relevancy in both the civilian workforce, aka my daily bread, and the military workforce. It's definitely a commitment and sacrifice to staying relevant and promoting in both. How are the behemoth active duty components going to raise a military that can compete with the same level of relevancy? The National Guard and reservists combined don't have enough resources to do take on all the things pointed out in this article.
ReplyDeleteTalent management needs to be a much broader subject that the small paragraph in this article. To stay relevant with our enemies, we must restructure our recruiting efforts to pull from the civilian workforce that has experience in the technical arenas. Additionally, we need to restructure our retention efforts. Many people in the tech world with the skills necessary to the strategic defense of our nation cannot/will not pass military standardized (catch-all) tests. Not just physical fitness tests, but also mental and health tests and military social customs. It's just not going to happen. The talent we need do not ascribe to the military thinking. On a general level, the U.S. military recruits and trains killers, not programmers, coders and thinkers. We contract all of the work requiring technical occupational skills mentioned in the article. To start recruiting and retaining that type of talent, the DOD will need a complete overhaul to it's "military life".
The article presents some real challenges for the National Guard and the MI community in particular. As the DOD changes focus from what has been primarily a COIN environment in order to prepare for a peer to peer conflict or hybrid threat, our training will need to change as well. Our challenge as leaders will need to be how we can best utilize our very limited time and resources for the best results especially when most of our SMs will continue to be most likely deployed as individuals or small teams and their training does not fit nicely within the typical ARFOGEN cycle that the maneuver elements have to train. I believe this begins during ATMS with reevaluating our MEDEL and drilling in on the most relevant tasks that offer our SMs the ability to adapt quickly and to think creatively in order to stay in step or ideally a step ahead of an ever changing threat.
ReplyDeleteLove the feedback! Well done!
ReplyDeleteThree things really stand out to me in the 2018 NDS. 1) The focus of the document is on near-peer State actors. This is a real departure from past strategies and highlights the sources of our most pressing threats. 2) The concept that the U.S. will be "strategically predictable, but operationally unpredictable". This statement should put our adversaries on notice that the status quo can and will change. Just because we're not defending or deterring an adversary today in a certain region or realm doesn't mean we won't be there tomorrow. 3) Prioritize preparedness for war. I love the statement "Achieving peace through strength requires the Joint Force to deter conflict through preparedness for war." This highlights exactly what I feel we're doing at the unit level. Adversaries resort to force when they believe they can beat us in a fight. We have to ensure adversaries know that our preparedness, capability, and will to act will always give us the upper hand in any fight. This will always be our challenge.