++ Wars, How are they fought?

[omar]

How exactly are modern wars fought and sustained?

By modern i also mean from WW2 to the present. The logistics, the supplying of armies, attacking the opposition, especially how big armies fought in world war 2, like in Roman times it was very simple you go up to the guy and kill him, and numbers mattered a lot more then now, but fighting in world war 2 with urban places and traveling far it must have been a lot different.

Please recommend me books or palaces where i can really learn a lot, without going to a military academy

How exactly are modern wars fought and sustained?
especially attention to maneuver warfare and logistics (food and ammunition)

[Poach]

Well, in basic a frontline is divided into areas, which are ocupied by Army Groups, Armies, Corps and Divisions. From there down, Division HQ usually assigns specific areas, goals or objectives to Brigades or Regiments, and their HQs handle assigning even more specific objectives, positions etc to Battalions, who in turn provide specific objectives to companies, where the Lt. in charge usually directs his soldiers from the thick of the action as circumstance requires it.

Logistics are all tiered in the same way. From the supply port/airfield/depot, supplies are sent to match requests as best as can be done to the respective entities that requested them, who then send them on to their sub-entities, who send them on to their sub-entities until the bullets and food end up in a soldiers backpack and the fuel in a tank or truck.

In the 2nd World War, most of what happened was at a fairly high level, the Eastern Front was a titanic clash of Army Groups and the Western Front was done at a largely Army or Division level. In Afghanistan I'd be surprised if there ever was a Division level movement, it's a much smaller war where, even in the recent Moshtarak offensive, you probably only saw, if at all, a Brigade level advance.

[antaeus]

In the 2nd World War, most of what happened was at a fairly high level, the Eastern Front was a titanic clash of Army Groups and the Western Front was done at a largely Army or Division level. In Afghanistan I'd be surprised if there ever was a Division level movement, it's a much smaller war where, even in the recent Moshtarak offensive, you probably only saw, if at all, a Brigade level advance.

most modern western armies have effectively done away with divisional organisation.. even those who maintain divisions on paper are usually only managed at that scale in peacetime. on the ground they are more often managed at brigade level (or lower) - which allows a more modular and flexible approach to any particular situation.

there's a couple of former us soldiers about here who could probably give us insights into how the us army's supply system works in the field now days... i suspect burger king plays a fairly important part.

[Tiberius Tosi]

In the 2nd World War, most of what happened was at a fairly high level, the Eastern Front was a titanic clash of Army Groups and the Western Front was done at a largely Army or Division level. In Afghanistan I'd be surprised if there ever was a Division level movement, it's a much smaller war where, even in the recent Moshtarak offensive, you probably only saw, if at all, a Brigade level advance.

Rumsfeld made the brigade the main operational unit for the US Army. Divisions are usually not longer sent as a whole, and Brigade Combat Teams instead are deployed as self sufficient units logistically. The idea is that the US is logistically sound enough to supply at the brigade level when brigades from different divisions could be all over the world at the same time, and allows for easier movements and more rapid deployment because of the smaller size and it also allows much more flexibility in the passing down of orders as is needed in the combat zone.

They are currently still in the process of transitioning (aren't in too big of a hurry to do it all at once, as it would be too messy to do so), so you can probably find examples of the divisions being deployed together at the outset of the Iraq War in 2003, although it was much less common than in the Gulf War, I believe (much of this however has to do with the smaller size of the invasion force).

[Chukada1]

With lots of guns.

What a silly question, modern wars are fought like any other.

[Poach]

^ Nope...

[Poach]

By all means give us a detailed account, I know know the basics of military logistics, it's never something I've ever read up on or had much of an interest in. I know a one or two RLC people but, and no offense if you're a former logistics guy, I'd probably fall asleep midway through the explanation

Did we not go into Iraq on a Divisional level, atleast until we finished the war and began the occupation? I'm pretty sure a reasonable chunk of 1(UK) Armoured went into action as a group. I know what you mean though, everything is done around Brigades these days.

[antaeus]

Did we not go into Iraq on a Divisional level, atleast until we finished the war and began the occupation? I'm pretty sure a reasonable chunk of 1(UK) Armoured went into action as a group. I know what you mean though, everything is done around Brigades these days.

yeah, the united states used divisions in iraq too, i believe it's a process that's in evolution as we speak. i get the feeling though, that the media over simplified the way forces in iraq in 2003 operated.

the us army deployed the 3rd, 4th and 101st airborn divisions as well as the first marine division... but these days us divisions are quite clearly broken down into independent brigades entirely capable of operating under their own or separate command, and their plans for the future suggest that those brigades will be more and more their own command - even in 2003, their deployment seems to have been very modular (brigades from each of those divisions have operated on their own, and even in other theatres such as afghanistan).

if anybody hasn't seen or read generation kill, it might be worth a watch, as there's quite a bit of satire and humour surrounding POGs (persons other than grunts) and they also discuss the chain of command and the way in which units of men are deployed and managed fairly thoroughly.

[omar]

I appreciate you guys replying, i hope i can get more info though. What amazes me is how the Germans must have gotten food and ammunition supplies in the Eastern front it must have been so chaotic, i wonder if there were trains or trucks.

We always hear about wars and people fighting but not really how they are fought and supported.

As sad and bad war can be, it is simply amazing (modern warfare) it shows the level of organization of humans, and how it has changed, how they will try to
unify against their enemies and do all it takes to win, even if they have to learn boring subjects, which of course i don't find boring at all.

War is Brilliant! (edit i bet if i ever saw war i wouldn't call it brilliant hahah lol)

[Poach]

1 Armoured was also composed of modular brigades, I fully agree with you that modern warfare is scaling down, I believe the MoD is also beginning to think along the lines of "fly-away brigades" as opposed to divisions. That's not to say that the days of Divisional warfare are gone, but the likelihood of a war requiring much above Brigade movement these days is indeed unlikely.

Generation Kill, the tv series, was actually a good watch. I'd also recommend it.

[Yorkshireman]

The British Army is still organised on a Divisional basis but deploys at mainly brigade level in recent conflicts. The Division though still remains important as a training/administrative hub. If we were to go into a major war again though, thats how they'd deploy, as a Division. (If we've got enough soldiers left by then)

[Azog 150]

^^I thought the British Army was made up of 6 Divisions, but only 2 are deployable.

[Yorkshireman]

^^I thought the British Army was made up of 6 Divisions, but only 2 are deployable.

Yes, but we should in theory be able to deploy 5 Divisions in time of major war, weather thats actually possible I've no idea ? (Though todays Division's are'nt comparable in size to anything from WW1/WW2 or even the 1960's)

[Poach]

2 and 3-5 Div. are administrative in the British Army, 1 and 3 Div. are the combat readiness Divisions that are deployed and 6 Div. is an HQ only. Most European armies are still organised around Divisons.

I believe the US Army is still organised as high up as Army level, but they're entirely administrative in nature. Didn't they start a major restructuring effort not too long ago to change the focus from major-warfighting to expeditionary warfare?

[Poach]

It probably would be, 2 and 3-5 are tied down by regional commands, such as responsibility for TA units and admin, 1 and 3 Div. have no attached TA or administrative duties, allowing them to be easily deployed. In a time of major war, the TA units would be deployed as part of the Divisions Order Of Battle and the regional admin duties would be detached to allow the Division to deploy.

[Katsumoto]

Tom Clancy wrote a good book about a fictional war between NATO and Russia set during the late Cold War era. Even though it's a fiction book, it's based on the military protocol of the time and deals with everything from naval warfare to mechanized fighting to espionage. It's very good if you are interested in how a conventional war would've been fought with modern technology.

The book is called Red Storm Rising.

[GreyFox]

I'd recommend 'The Generals' War: The Inside Story of the Conflict in the Gulf" by Michael Gordon and General Bernard Trainor. It's about the First Gulf War, the run up to it and how it was planned and fought. it's written in an easy to understand manner and is very informative.