Readings Newsletter
Become a Readings Member to make your shopping experience even easier.
Sign in or sign up for free!
You’re not far away from qualifying for FREE standard shipping within Australia
You’ve qualified for FREE standard shipping within Australia
The cart is loading…

This title is printed to order. This book may have been self-published. If so, we cannot guarantee the quality of the content. In the main most books will have gone through the editing process however some may not. We therefore suggest that you be aware of this before ordering this book. If in doubt check either the author or publisher’s details as we are unable to accept any returns unless they are faulty. Please contact us if you have any questions.
Operation Anaconda, a subordinate operation to Operation Enduring Freedom in 2002, was notable for difficulties in integrating US air and ground forces in order to bring combat power to bear on a stronger than originally anticipated foe. In the seven years of study and debate since 2002, key players from both sides have for the most part agreed that with better preliminary coordination, the operation could have been executed less risk to US and coalition personnel. While many commentators have noted that suboptimal command and control relationships, lack of communication, and confusion all contributed to the initial problems in air/ground coordination, few have examined the joint and service doctrine from 2002 to determine to what degree it might have negatively influenced the smooth planning and execution of the operation. This study seeks to determine if any inconsistencies or omissions in joint and service doctrine may have contributed to the problems with air and ground integration observed in Operation Anaconda, and also to determine if doctrinal updates since 2002 have adequately addressed any systemic disconnects the study discovers. In any cases where modern doctrine still does not address the key problems noted in Anaconda, the study will suggest modifications to doctrine which will increase the likelihood that the key "lessons observed" from the operation truly become "lessons learned" in the institutional consciousnesses of the ground and air components.
This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.
This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.
As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
$9.00 standard shipping within Australia
FREE standard shipping within Australia for orders over $100.00
Express & International shipping calculated at checkout
This title is printed to order. This book may have been self-published. If so, we cannot guarantee the quality of the content. In the main most books will have gone through the editing process however some may not. We therefore suggest that you be aware of this before ordering this book. If in doubt check either the author or publisher’s details as we are unable to accept any returns unless they are faulty. Please contact us if you have any questions.
Operation Anaconda, a subordinate operation to Operation Enduring Freedom in 2002, was notable for difficulties in integrating US air and ground forces in order to bring combat power to bear on a stronger than originally anticipated foe. In the seven years of study and debate since 2002, key players from both sides have for the most part agreed that with better preliminary coordination, the operation could have been executed less risk to US and coalition personnel. While many commentators have noted that suboptimal command and control relationships, lack of communication, and confusion all contributed to the initial problems in air/ground coordination, few have examined the joint and service doctrine from 2002 to determine to what degree it might have negatively influenced the smooth planning and execution of the operation. This study seeks to determine if any inconsistencies or omissions in joint and service doctrine may have contributed to the problems with air and ground integration observed in Operation Anaconda, and also to determine if doctrinal updates since 2002 have adequately addressed any systemic disconnects the study discovers. In any cases where modern doctrine still does not address the key problems noted in Anaconda, the study will suggest modifications to doctrine which will increase the likelihood that the key "lessons observed" from the operation truly become "lessons learned" in the institutional consciousnesses of the ground and air components.
This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.
This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.
As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.