Battle of Argonne Forest The Battle of Argonne Forest, also known as the Meuse-Argonne Offensive, was the deadliest battle in United States history (Lengel). The battle dealt a decisive blow to the German offensive and helped assure an allied victory in World War I. An analysis of this major battle covers an overview of events before the battle, force comparisons between sides, doctrinal methodology used, logistics, intelligence, conditions and morale as well as battlefield leadership present. Germany formed a plan to March on Paris in 1918, which would almost guarantee full control of the country by the end of the year (Smith). To accomplish this, Germany massed 35 Divisions and began its march toward Paris. Tenacious fighting forced besieged …show more content…
The Argonne-Muse offensive was no different. Some of the key American leaders on the allied side were General John J. Pershing and Lieutenant General Hunter Liggett (Bigelow). A key French leader was Henri Gouraud (Duffey) and a key German leader was Georg von der Marwitz (Rickard). The mix of leadership of the Battle of Argonne Forest will ultimately shape the outcome of the battle and help shape the ending of the war …show more content…
Pershing 1860-1948). He is a Graduate of the Military Academy at West Point and the University of Nebraska. His experience began during the Spanish – American War where he met another well know historical figure, Lieutenant Douglas MacArthur. Douglas Mac Arthur described General Pershing as having "ramrod bearing, steely gaze and confidence-inspiring jaw created almost a caricature of nature's soldier (General John J. Pershing 1860-1948)." This description shows how General Pershing kept such a domineering command presence. Lieutenant General Hunter Liggett was also a West Point graduate who served in the Spanish American War (Bigelow). He commanded I Corps under General Pershing during the Battle of Argonne Forrest. According to (Bigelow), General Liggett based his leadership style on two key principles, taking care of his soldier’s and maintaining an admirable character. His Soldiers knew him as a detailed leader and takes great preparation in his units and Soldiers before going into battle. He also takes great care in his decision-making and tries to think of alternative solutions before making a decision
The award-winning novel by Stephen Ambrose, Band of Brothers: Easy Company, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne from Normandy to Hitler's Eagle's Nest, discusses one of the greatest examples of mission command in the form of 1st Lieutenant Richard Winters and his role in the Brecourt Manor Assault. This battle is a textbook example of how to fight against a superior enemy force that outnumbered the unit by four times as much. Facing overwhelming odds with just 16 paratroopers against over 60 German Soldiers, 1LT Winters nevertheless prevails and succeeds in achieving his objective while minimizing casualties to just three Soldiers lost. Looking back further into the American Revolution, the Battle of Bunker Hill on the American side is one of the earliest examples of Mission Command under the command of COL William Prescott.
Throughout history there have been many great leaders. Many leaders who have changed the shape of America and also soldiers of today’s Army. One leader that comes to mind and has shaped me into the leader I am today is Abraham Lincoln. When I look at Abraham Lincoln and what he has done, I think of what Army Leadership manual ADRP 6-22 defines what a leader should be and how leadership is based off of attributes and competencies.
Operational leaders see how the individual components of an organization fit together and use those individuals work to make a larger outcome. When they focus on a problem, they think of what works best within the process and systems to make an impact on the situation. These types of leaders play a big part in making sure that things get done in an effective and functioning manner. According to the Army Doctrine ADP 6-0, the Army over time has strayed away from operational leaders and adapted Mission Command, which gives leaders the ability at the lowest level the capability to exercise disciplined initiative in an act of carrying out the larger mission . Mission Command is made up of the following six steps: Understanding, Visualize, Describe, Direct, Lead and Assess, in which a commander is responsible for. General Patton understood the intent of the Battle of the Bulge on different levels, he was able to form a mental image for the course of actions for the allies, enemies and lead his Army into combat while guiding his officers and soldiers to succeed in meeting his intent. The Battle of the Bulge is where General Patton gained one of his greatest military achievements by using his tactical leadership and logistical genius, which in return helped him turn around the main forces and forced the Germans to drive back in their final counter-offensive. General Patton strongly exercised Mission Command by understanding, visualizing, leading, and commanding what was known as the largest and bloodiest battle during World War II.
“Arracourt was the greatest tank battle of the war on the Allied Front.” This is how US Major General John S. Wood described the Battle of Arracourt, which took place in the last weeks of September 1944 in Northern France. The Allied Forces had landed in Normandy in June 1944, and by the summer had broken out of their beachhead. This started the great pursuit of the German forces across northern France towards the German border. By early fall of 1944, General George S. Patton’s Third Army had raced across France faster than anyone had envisioned and was in place to cross the Moselle River in the Lorraine area. Here his forces would face supply issues due to their speed of advance, increasing resistance from prepared German forces, and increasingly difficult weather. Patton’s first obstacle was the Moselle River and the fortress city of Metz. After crossing the Moselle with most of the Third Army by mid September, the US Third Army’s armored units were engaged in the largest tank battles of the Western Front at Arracourt. The next phase of the campaign was to reorganize and train. In early November, the Third Army attacked again and was able to capture Metz by late November, and reached the Sarre River and the West Wall. During the long Lorraine Campaign in late 1944, the US Third Army armored units were able to overcome stiff enemy resistance, superior quality vehicles, hard terrain, and difficult weather with the use of superior tactics, doctrine and leadership.
In this paper, I will provide a Battle Analysis and outline the events leading up to and surrounding the Battle of 73 Eastings (refers to a north-south grid line). In addition, I will describe how the United States Army’s (USA) 2nd Armored Calvary Regiment (ACR) defeated forces from the Iraqi Republican Guard (IRG) using speed, technology and superior combat power. Although some consider the Battle of 73 Eastings extremely successful, some consider it a failure due to the large amount of Iraqi forces that retreated towards Bagdad. Lastly, I will analyze how each side used their intelligence assets and what they could have used to change the outcome.
Keegan chooses the three well documented campaigns of Agincourt in 1415, Waterloo in 1815, and Somme in 1916 to answer the question of his thesis: To find out how men who are faced with the threat of single-missile and multiple-missile weapons control their fears, fix their wounds, and face their death. In his words he is seeking “to catch a glimpse of the face of battle.”
The War of 1812 was a difficult one for the new the United States of America, as the country struggled to find its place on the world stage. It was hampered by its association with France, the presence of Great Britain and her native allies to the north, the uncertainty of the path its leaders would choose for her and in no small part her own hubris. All of these factors would be present in some part at the battle of Bladensburg, which has often been referred to as “the greatest disgrace ever dealt to American arms” and that defeat changed the mindset of many, setting the US on the path that created today's modern military. I will examine the immediate ramifications if there was a change in the proficiency of US military intelligence of the day and how that would have affected Bladensburg. Further I will hypothesize on how the US would look today if Bladensburg had been a US victory.
To write this book the author, John Toland, had to devote 15 years researching different stories from all sides of the war. He studied war memoirs, interviewed war veterans, and read military documents. While doing this he focused on both the allied and axis forces to truly understand both sides of the story and be able to write such a descriptive and accurate piece of work. This research was used in the book to describe the unlikely victory of the Americans over the Germans during the “Battle of the Bulge”.
...he AEF was organized. He led the first true combined force into battle. Because of him, we had a tank force that was integrated with infantry maneuvers to create a full spectrum force, a force that today, they call modular forces, then were flexible forces. Military strategy has not changed as much as many think over the years. Smart men have tweaked some ideas but the base idea is concrete. Our tactics and leader responsibilities have not changed. With my research, I did not find what I was looking for, but what I found was profound. I found a man that inspires me to be a better leader, tactician and student of my profession. I will close with my favorite quote from the late General of the Armies John “Black Jack” Pershing. “A competent leader can get efficient service from poor troops, while on the contrary an incapable leader can demoralize the best of troops.”
The American Revolution was a struggle for the American military from the beginning. The British Army was a better trained and equipped force. The Battles of Lexington and Concord following the battle of Bunker Hill were significant to the victory of the American forces over the British. The Battle of Bunker Hill on the Charlestown peninsula north of Boston on June 17th 1775 was arguably one of the key events that set in motion American victory. The battle was a loss for America, but the audacity and strength the American militiamen showed in the face of adversity inspired later actions by other forces in America to fight against a far superior enemy. This paper will analyze the tenets of mission command as exercised by Colonel William Prescott, to include: understanding the battlefield, visualizing weaknesses, and directing reinforcements throughout his leading and assessment processes. COL Prescott also used his presence on the hill to motivate his men to hold their positions in the face of overwhelming odds.
Warfare was in a state of transition. Older commanders and generals in the French and British militaries were very cavalry and infantry focused. These commanders believed that cavalry, infantry, and artillery would assure victory in any circumstance, against any foe. They clung to the static tactics of the bygone World War I era. World War I had been fought primarily on French soil, and the military as well as the government never wanted that to happen again, therefore they wanted to reinforce their main border against any future German. Little did they know that only twenty two years later they would be bested by German forces in a way that would shock the world. This research will be analyzing many important assumptions, oversights,...
General George S. Patton was a great man, and accomplished many great things in his career as a military officer. He was hard-nosed and didn’t stand for coward ness. For these reasons he made a great General. He would not let his troops quit, and he never quit himself, and for that he got much admiration. Patton was an undeniable motivator; his speeches got to the heart of the issue and could motivate even the weakest men to engage in battle. General Omar Nelson Bradley was a different kind of man. He is regarded as “the soldier’s general.” He showed care and compassion to his men, even those who were too scared to fight. Bradley like Patton were both highly regarded generals and did there jobs well each being promoted throughout their career. But, they each had their own methods of motivation and leadership.
General George S. Patton, Jr.: Main Concepts, Stategy, Tactics, Leadership. (n.d.). Retrieved May 5, 2013, from University of North Carolina Wilimington: http://people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/pattonnew.doc
Regardless of the career you choose in your life, whether it be an accountant or a Soldier in the United States Army, someone, somewhere most likely had an influence to bring you to that decision. The Army defines leadership as the process of influencing people by providing purpose, direction, and motivation while operating to accomplish the mission and improve the organization (JP, p. 1). Now imagine you are a young Private, in one of the most dangerous places in Iraq and you have constant leadership changes, and not much support from your direct leadership. I am sure at this point you can imagine, it is not the best scenario to be in. Throughout the duration of this essay you will read about Sergeant First Class Rob Gallagher and Sergeant First Class Jeff Fenlason, their leadership abilities, and the techniques they attempted to use to resolve the issues in this Platoon that was in a downward spiral after losing many leaders to the hell of war.
The year of 1918: This was the year the “German military saw high command attempt one final large-scale offensive on the Western Front.” (Timeline- 1918, Duffy, 2009) because of the fall of 1918 Germany was not able to continue fighting. “With revolution imminent, Germany's political leadership petitioned for an armistice. It took effect at 11am on 11 November.” (Timeline-1918, Duffy, 2009) Because of this event many Dynasties in Europe fell apart and were not able to continue their fight without the support of Germany. On May 27, third German Spring offensive, “Third Battle of the Aisne, and begins in French sector along Chemin des Dames.”(Timeline-1918, Duffy, 2009) Germany came back and started a new battle. Two days before Germany