The Raid at Cabanatuan, also known as The Great Raid, is a rescue of American and allied prisoners of war and civilians from a Japanese camp in Pangatian, Cabanatuan City, Nueva Ecija on January 30, 1945. Remaining as the most successful rescue mission in U.S. military history, United States Army Rangers, Alamo Scouts, and Filipino guerrillas liberated more than 500 from the POW camp, during World War II. In this battle that Lieutenant Colonel Henry Mucci played the vital role as the leader of the 6th Ranger Battalion troops. Thus, this paper aims to discuss and define the characteristics of Lt Col Mucci as a leader which led to the success of this mission portraying several principles of mission command. Mission command is the exercise of authority and direction by …show more content…
They became experts at hand-to-hand combat, bayonet and knife fighting, and marksmanship-elite fighters. Meanwhile, Alamo Scouts were skilled soldiers as a reconnaissance unit attached to the Ranger Unit. Thus, units involved on this operation were experienced and skilled which had worked together in the past. Cohesive teams through mutual trust had been formed through hard training and several combat operations. Lt Col Mucci, itself, was a skilled fighter and led several successful operations with most of the involved troops on this operation. Likewise, relationship between US and Filipino troops was not hard to build because Filipino guerillas were mostly former USAFFE soldiers who fought side by side with US soldiers. Augmentation of the guerillas on limited period of time is sufficient for the moment for integration before the mission, making the command structures firmly in place. And they served for the same purpose, that is, to defend their respective countries and its people from Imperial Japanese forces. Additionally, the air support elements were all experts in their own
Mission Command as defined by the United States Army consists six distinct and critical principles. During World War II there were many examples of exemplary mission command that led to stunning victories for the Allies but also many examples of failure. The Battle for Arnhem or Operation Market-Garden was such a failure. Major General Robert Elliot Urquhart, the Commander of the 1st Airborne Division failed in not only in tactics but the ability to lead his division to victory. He did not completely misunderstand the principles of mission command, but four main areas in which he made critical mistakes were; Build a Cohesive Team Through Mutual Trust, Create a Shared Understanding, Accept Prudent Risk, and Exercise Disciplined Initiative.
The purpose of this paper is to perform a mission command analysis of the Battle of Gettysburg, honing in on Pickett’s Charge. The Battle of Gettysburg took place on July 1st through July 3rd in 1863 in the town of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. The belligerents were the Army of the Potomac, led by MG George G. Meade and the Army of Northern Virginia, led by GEN Robert E. Lee. The goal is to analyze the decisions of GEN Lee using the six mission command principles described in the Army Doctrine Publication 6-0 and then assess the outcome of those decisions.
Mission command is the commander's use of authority and direction to empower adaptive leaders in the conduct of unified land operations. It helps subordinates exercise disciplined initiative when operating within their commander’s intent. To facilitate effective mission command, commanders must accomplish four consecutive stages of the operations process. They must thoroughly understand the problem, visualize a solution that achieves a desired end state, and then accurately describe this visualization in order to direct the organization. Commanders continually lead and assess their organizations and provide input and influence to their subordinates and staff.
COL Prescott’s role in the Battle of Bunker Hill, or more correctly know as the Battle of Breed’s Hill, is a great example of how to properly execute mission command. An overview from The Cowpens Staff Ride and Battlefield Tour (Moncure) reveals a number of operation and strategic objectives that the American militia had to consider. In this instance, COL Prescott takes charge of 1200 men with instructions to defend against incoming British forces that were seeking to occupy the surrounding hills during the Siege of Boston campaign. COL Prescott utilized a variety of steps in the operations process that contributed to his expert utilization of mission command over his forces. Through various sources from published works by experts on the subject, COL Prescott’s mission command demonstrates its effectiveness in his understanding of the situation against the British, his visualization to create an end state for t...
The mission command philosophy helps commanders counter the uncertainty of operations by reducing the amount of certainty needed to act. Commanders can build teams and achieve their final goals through adapting the six principles of mission command to warfighting situation. I analyzed and compared the performance of General Sherman and General Hampton in four of six mission command principles.
The Battle of Antietam could have been a devastating and fatal blow to the Confederate Army if Gen. McClellan acted decisively, took calculated risks, and veered away from his cautious approach to war. There are many instances leading up to the battle and during the battle in which he lacks the necessary offensive initiative to effectively cripple and ultimately win the war. This paper is intended to articulate the failure of Mission Command by GEN McClellan by pointing out how he failed to understand, visualize, describe and direct the battlefield to his benefit.
In order to receive a victory in the Battle of the Bulge, General Patton used Mission Command Analysis in order to understand how he can be successful for this mission. The first thing of understanding t...
13 Todd Marzano, Criticisms Associated with Operation Anaconda, Can Long Distance Leadership Be Effective, 9.
The Battle of Antietam on September 17th, 1862 was the single, most bloodiest day in American History, where more than 23,000 men became casualties of war. General George Brinton McClellan’s inability to use Mission Command, as a warfighting function was a key reason this battle did not end the American Civil War. An analysis of General McClellan’s Mission Command operational process will show how his personality, bias, and fear were detrimental to the outcome of the Battle of Antietam.
ISBN 0-87021-562-0. Cressman, Robert J.; et al. d. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. "A Glorious page in our history", Adm. Chester Nimitz, 1942: the Battle of Midway, 4–6 June 1942. Missoula, Mont. -. Pictorial Histories Pub.
Amid the snow-covered hills in the tiny village of Chipyong-Ni, Korea, a battle ridden 23rd Regimental Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division made a decisive stand from February 13-15, 1951 that would lead to the first operational win against a much stronger and larger force. In what some considered being the Gettysburg of the Korean War, the Battle of Chipyong-Ni was a bitterly contested engagement between the X Corp, 23rd Regimental Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, under the command of COL. Paul Freeman the North Korean People’s Army and the Chinese Communist Forces’ (CCF). This analysis will demonstrate that COL Paul Freemans’ ability to properly use mission command ultimately led to the first operational defeat of the enemy since the Korean War had started.
These men had returned with the news of a Spanish outpost with the name Las Guasimas. By afternoon of the same day the Rough Riders had been order to head out to the location of Las Guasimas and eliminate all opposition and secure the surrounding area, the men would camp outside the outpost then attack the next morning. For started, the Rough Riders were at a disadvantage, they were not accustom to the dense jungles of Cuba in which they were fighting in, and did not know the jungles trails like the Spanish did. Yet the next morning the attack commenced, with General Young, commander of the cavalry and regulars, attacked the outpost straight on.
To support this statement, this paper will highlight events in his time as the United States Central Command Commander validated his visionary leadership skills. Next, it will address the events that demonstrate the decisions General Schwarzkopf made that clearly validate those of an ethical leader. Finally, this paper will discuss the relevance of why it is important for a Combatant Commander of such a wide area of responsibility to possess both of these traits. Let us begin by highlighting events in his military career that establish his visionary leader characteristics.
As a Marine, it is imperative to have leadership skills along with being capable of working with others. This book was written to enhance the reader’s mentality of how the Marines operate. It informs those who are looking into the service, and provides an in depth look into the trials and tribulations it has been through—as well as conquered. This book substantially explains the vigorous training platoon 3086 went through in order to earn the title of being a Marine.
The most effective commanders through their leadership build cohesive teams. Mutual trust, shared understanding, and accepting prudent risk serve as just a few principles for mission command. Mutual trust is the foundation of any successful professional relationship that a commander shares with his staff and subordinates. The shared understanding of an operational environment functions, as the basis for the commander to effectively accomplish the mission. While my advice for the commander on what prudent risks to take may create more opportunities rather than accepting defeat. Incorporating the principles of mission command by building cohesive teams through mutual trust, fostering an environment of shared understanding, and accepting prudent risk will make me an effective adviser to the commander, aid the staff during the operations process, and provide an example for Soldiers to emulate.