Quote:
Originally Posted by WarriorDiplomat
https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-...warfare-group/
I am not sure if this was ever a good idea given I dont know any good commanders who actually tried to correct their units tactical issues. They always seemed like they were producing information information for commanders who didnt want to do the work themselves to know what is going on
|
Rapid Equipping Force(REF) is gone as well.
An argument could be made they were both stop-gap & born to ultimately make themselves redundant.
Pete Newell’s(REF plankowner) IED slide is still the most impactful PowerPoint slide I’ve ever seen covering IED attacks and casualties overlaid with relative good/bad guy OODA loops.
It certainly looked like they saved a lot of lives.
But is problem curation, solution development, and rapid procurement so good now that it is actually true?
SOFWERX, AFWERX, DIUX, Hacking4Defense, etc have all been influenced or co-founded by folks from AWG/REF.
Further to that, the increasingly rare bi-partisan effort that created the Future of Defense Task Force 2020 report pushes hard for accelerating the kind of efforts AWG/REF were focused on.
I don’t know if chopping AWG/REF is a cost cutting initiative, a belief they were only good for CT support, or a belief that rapid institutional solution procurement makes them redundant.
What I do know is that the future fight between Clausewitz and Sun Tzu will probably be decided by which side better applies John Boyd prior to the fight.