3 ms·
The reasons behind this type of planning are interesting, but I wouldn't read too much into them. I've sat in on this type of wargaming before, and generally th
by craftinator 6y ago
The reasons behind this type of planning are interesting, but I wouldn't read too much into them. I've sat in on this type of wargaming before, and generally the workflow is as follows:
Military think-tank identifies a situation for which where there is no modern war plan, a situation which could possibly happen if global circumstances change.
Think-tank writes up a detailed notional scenario describing the world in which that situation could occur and hands it off to military leaders.
Military leaders present it as a war game to their staff, assign different units to different sides.
Military staff proceeds to generate plans to win their side of the 'war', possibly executing maneuvers in mock battles or training events, and write up lessons learned and battle tactics and strategies.
These write ups are compiled into "war plans" and codified.
- craftinator 6y agoTo clarify, these are done constantly. A large portion of the training events that the average military service member does are in support of these wargames. They are extremely effective in keeping up mission readiness at all levels; commanders get practice solving difficult military problems in peacetime, battalions get practice coordinating deployments and operations, and individual units and personnel get practice using tactics and equipment. The only real downside is that they are vastly expensive.
- RhysU 6y agoThey are less expensive than losing the occasional war.
- craftinator 6y agoTrue! But when was last time the US was forced into a war? I believe that was World War 2. Ever since then we have been voluntarily policing the world, and losing many of those "wars".