Operation Anaconda Operation Anaconda took place as a part of the War in Afghanistan in early March of 2002. It happened in the Shahikot valley of eastern Afghanistan. The purpose of the operation was to take out enemy Taliban and al Qaeda forces that were gathered in the area. U.S. forces built a complex plan to achieve this end state. They planned to use a “hammer and anvil” attack that used U.S. forces as well as friendly Afghani armed forces to quickly kill or capture the enemy. Intel told commanders that the enemy was likely to retreat as they have in the past when driven back by fierce opposition. They estimated would be a three day battle. While the end state of this battle was a United States victory, it wasn’t achieved by the preplanned means. Instead, this battle lasted 17 days long and served as a learning point to the U.S. military. The mistakes seen in this battle did not reappear when later missions took place in the invasion of Iraq in 2003. This short analysis will go further into depth of what happened during March 2-18 2002, using some of the principles of war, and will serve as learning point for future missions. The area of operations is the Shahikot Valley, which is 80 miles southeast of Kabul, and 18 miles south of Gardez. The Valley is 5 miles long and 2.5 miles wide. In the valley are 4 small towns, Marzak, Babulkhel, Serkhankhel and Zerki Kale. The valley is surrounded by High Mountain ridges. On the west side there is a ridge code named Whale which is 9,000 feet high and on the east side is a ridgeline where the highest peak (10,469 feet) is called Takur Ghar. On the southern end of the valley is a ridgeline called the finger. The valley is easy to defend because it has many natural caves and ravines ... ... middle of paper ... ...the peak of Takur Ghar. When the helicopter lowered its ramp to let the SEALs out it came under enemy fire and was badly damaged. In the chaos, one SEAL fell out of the ramp and landed on the ground. A rescue effort and deployment of men in sued to achieve a vantage point on the peak. Events on the ground began to take more favorable course. On March 9th U.S. forces took control of the last remaining pass out of the valley. By March 12th the enemy was either killed or fled the valley. We can learn from this battle that the principles of war are in fact important and careful consideration needs to be taken to make sure that they are not overlooked. It is important not to rely on lightly armed ground forces but also coordinate air forces when given the chance to maximize massing effects. And the unity of command in order to direct all forces to a unified goal.
In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the United States was incredibly eager to strike back at the nations thought to be responsible for this horrific tragedy. These attacks were quickly attributed to the terrorist group al-Qa’ida, led by Osama bin Laden, and to the Taliban-run government of Afghanistan, which had provided sanctuary to al-Qa’ida. In response, Washington approved a covert plan led by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to directly attack those responsible in their Middle East safe haven. Initiated on 26 September 2001 with the approval of the warlords of the Afghan Northern Alliance, with whom the CIA had formed an intelligence liaison relationship, Operation Jawbreaker resulted in the fall of the Taliban regime, the killing and capture of a significant amount of al-Qa’ida leadership, and elimination of a terrorist safe haven by early December 2001. Moreover, the Taliban’s collapse denied al-Qa’ida a pseudo-nation-state partner, serving to reduce the organization’s sanctuary to areas residing along the Pakistani border. Operation Jawbreaker, one of the first post-9/11 covert operations carried out by the United States in support of its national security interests, had proved successful. Word of the operation’s swift success astounded those back in Washington; dubbed the CIA’s “finest hour,” it signified the first of many victories by deposing the Taliban’s control of Northern Afghanistan.
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.
To set the stage for this battle, we must first understand what the British were thinking at the time. The British had not ...
Army to take the Ridge. This essay will prove that after many struggles, and careful
Brigade General Scales, Robert H. JR. Certain Victory. The U.S. Army in the Gulf War.
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...
In the center of the LZ was a large termite hill that was to become Moore's command post. Moore was the first man out of the lead chopper to hit the landing zone, firing his M16 rifle. Little did Moore and his men suspect that fate had sent them into the first major battle of the Vietnam War between the American Army and the People's Army of Vietnam, and into the history books.... ... middle of paper ... ...
September 11, 2001, Osama Bin Laden decided to “wake the sleeping giant.” The US immediately sent SOF units and CIA officers to recon the area and meet with the Northern Alliance. The primary battle leading up to this operation was Tora Bora, which was absent of conventional forces. Up until this point, the war on terror was predominantly a Special Operations fight along with Air Force for overhead support.3 SOF and the Northern Alliance had already displaced Taliban forces out of many towns and villages in northern Afghanistan to gain control of key terrain. Key towns in northern Afghanistan including Taloqan, Konduz, Herat, and Mazar-e Sharif took only three weeks to clear.4 The SOF units were making huge impacts across the country calling in air strikes. At the same time the SOF units were diligently...
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.
The Battle of Kamdesh was fought in Afghanistan during the Afghan War. It is an occurrence in the ongoing NATO campaign of the Operation Enduring Freedom since the year 2001. It was one of the bloodiest battles the USA forces engaged in during this campaign against the Taliban insurgents. The Taliban insurgents, assisted by local Nuristan militias, attacked Kamdesh, which is an American combat outpost, located deep in the Nuristan tribal Areas. They carried out a well-coordinated attack on the outpost, leading to a breach and an overrun of the post. This paper, seeks to analyze why, when, how, and what were the resulting impact of the battle.
The battle I will be discussing is the battle of Tora Bora. The engagement took place in the mountains of eastern Afghanistan from December 12, 2001 to December 17, 2001. The units involved were from the CIA, numerous Special Forces groups, Pakistani soldiers and local anti-Taliban fighters. The mission given to the forces was to kill Osama bin Laden from the caves, leave the body with the Taliban and disrupt the Al Qaeda organization by removing their leader. The intent was to infiltrate the cave system, remove bin Laden and return home.
The military took time out to think about their training of soldiers. "Commanders sent troops in the Desert storm operation into battle with the words, “No My Lais—you hear?” (Linder). History is said to be good for one reason- to learn from past mistakes so they will not be repeated, and that is a very good lesson to learn from My Lai and one that all hope was, in fact, learned.
It is far easier for us in the present than it was for those at Gettysburg, to look back and determine the path that the leaders should have taken. As students, studying battles such as this, we have the advantage of hindsight, knowing the outcome. Nonetheless, we can still learn valuable lessons from it. To do so, this analysis will explore some of the decisions of the leaders at Gettysburg, and how they were affected by the operational variables. This essay will scrutinize some of the leaders at Gettysburg, and the impact of their actions. The outcome of this analysis will show that what was true in 1863 is still true today. While many variables are vital to a successful army on the battlefield, none should be neglected. Each variable discussed in this examination will prove to be important, but the information battle will be paramount in the battle of Gettysburg.
It began to emerge the differences in tactics. The question was whether to continue so far the Supreme Allied Commander of the Allied Forces Europe, General Eisenhower’s tactics attacking on a broad front, or due to problems of supply to take just one mighty blow. In that period Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery developed a new operation plan, which would include the use of 1st Airborne Army (Lieutenant General Lewis H. Brereton), actually 1st Airborne Corps (Lieutenant General Frederick Browning). The Corps comprised of 82nd US Airborne Division (Brigadier General James M. Gavin), 101st US Airborne Division (Major General Maxwell D. Taylor), and 1st British Airborne Division (Major General Robert “Roy” E. Urquhart) supported with, under his command, 1st Polish Independent Parachute Brigade (Major General Stanislaw Sosabowski). These units should be dropped along the roa...
Current military leadership should comprehend the nature of war in which they are engaged within a given political frame in order to develop plans that are coherent with the desired political end state. According to Clausewitz, war is an act of politics that forces an enemy to comply with certain conditions or to destroy him through the use of violence. A nation determines its vital interests, which drives national strategy to obtain or protect those interests. A country achieves those goals though the execution of one of the four elements of power, which are diplomatic, informational, military and economical means. The use of military force...