5
5
0
Russia’s botched invasion of Ukraine, along with unexpectedly dogged Ukrainian resistance, has sparked a debate about whether the current ways of measuring military capabilities are flawed. Indeed, U.S. intelligence analysts have been shocked by the rapid disintegration of the Afghan military in 2021, the collapse of Iraqi units in the face of the so-called Islamic State (or ISIS) in 2014, and Ethiopia’s shambolic performance against Tigrayan rebels in the last two years. U.S. analysts correctly predicted that Russia would invade in February, but their assumption that Ukraine would fall in a matter of days has only fueled the perception that something is amiss in how the intelligence community thinks about and measures military power. Prodded by angry lawmakers, the U.S. intelligence community has launched a sweeping internal review of how it assesses foreign military power amid its missteps in Afghanistan, Ukraine, and elsewhere.
How Inequality Hobbles Military Power
Posted from foreignaffairs.com
Equality
Intelligence
Posted 2 y ago
Responses: 2
2
2
0
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
..."Tracking inequality within armies is not a silver bullet. Analysts still need to account for military capabilities. Friction, uncertainty, and the fortunes of war will continue to confound even the best prewar assessments. But adding military inequality to net assessment will improve accuracy at a fraction of the cost of big-ticket technology, such as new satellite capabilities or clandestine signals intelligence. The ways in which social divisions and identities shape battlefield performance cannot be ignored. Military models must include the human elements of war or risk unwelcome surprises on the battlefield."...
..."Tracking inequality within armies is not a silver bullet. Analysts still need to account for military capabilities. Friction, uncertainty, and the fortunes of war will continue to confound even the best prewar assessments. But adding military inequality to net assessment will improve accuracy at a fraction of the cost of big-ticket technology, such as new satellite capabilities or clandestine signals intelligence. The ways in which social divisions and identities shape battlefield performance cannot be ignored. Military models must include the human elements of war or risk unwelcome surprises on the battlefield."...
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
I never judged my troops by the color of their skin, or treated some differently based upon what some would consider to be inequities. Personally (that is to say my opinion), these issues haven't been nearly the problem that those who wish to sow discord within the ranks have made them out to be.
The Army like most large organizations have a certain percentage of "NON-HACKERS". There has in my experience been little correlation between race, sexual orientation, gender inequalities, etc., etc. and the success of individual soldiers. Success is based on the desire to excel the passable performance. There is also a lot of luck and good timing as well. You cannot eliminate the latter, or motivate everyone to excel. Neither can all failure be blamed upon the inequities du jour.
The Army like most large organizations have a certain percentage of "NON-HACKERS". There has in my experience been little correlation between race, sexual orientation, gender inequalities, etc., etc. and the success of individual soldiers. Success is based on the desire to excel the passable performance. There is also a lot of luck and good timing as well. You cannot eliminate the latter, or motivate everyone to excel. Neither can all failure be blamed upon the inequities du jour.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google