Interesting People mailing list archives
more on US Military cognitive dissonance hitsa new low
From: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 09:44:32 -0500
------ Forwarded Message From: Steve Crocker <steve () stevecrocker com> Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002 09:28:23 -0500 To: dave () farber net Subject: RE: <[IP]> more on US Military cognitive dissonance hitsa new low Dave, The article cited by Stephen Poe announcing the Unified Command Structure looks pretty good. For readers who do not want to plow through its details or who are not familiar with the basic concept of a "unified command," let me offer a quick picture. (I am *not* an expert on this and the following explanation is about 30 years old, so I apologize if it's wrong in minor details. However, I did find it extremely helpful when I had it explained to me at the time, and your readers may too.) There are two org charts in the U.S. military. One is the budget allocation and organizational management structure. The military force is divided at the top level into the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps. Each Service is headed by a Chief of Staff, i.e. the highest ranking four star general or admiral who runs the entire Service. Each of these Services is subdivided through many layers pretty much as you would expect. The second org chart is the action oriented organization. The top level units in action oriented org chart are called Unified Commands. Each Unified Command is headed by a senior officer -- I think they're all four stars -- and each has elements from more than one Service. The Commands are organized primarily along geographic lines. For example, the Pacific Command (PACOM) is headquartered in Hawaii and has Navy and (FLEETPAC?) Air Force (PACAIR) elements. The Unified Commands all report to the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS). The JCS consists of the chiefs of the Services, mentioned above, and a four star officer who heads the JCS. He's the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Commanders of the Unified Commands and the Chairman of the JCS are chosen from various Services, usually rotating over time. Each Service Chiefs reports to his respective civilian Secretary, e.g. the Secretary of the Army, the Secretary of the Air Force, etc. The Secretaries all report to the Secretary of Defense. In contrast, the JCS reports directly to the Secretary of Defense, and through him to the President. The President is, among other things, the Commander in Chief. Minor tidbits: The Navy uses different nomenclature for the same concepts. The head of the Navy is the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO). There used to be "Unified and Specified Commands." A Specified Command was similar and parallel to a Unified Command except it only had personnel from a single Service. The Strategic Air Command (SAC) was the sole Specified Command. It had the long range bombers and missles poised to drop nuclear bombs on the Soviet Union. The SAC commander was also a top level general in the Air Force management tree, so he had access to both sides of the equation. (In matrix management terms, he owned both a row and a column.) He was a very powerful force to reckon with and during budget battles he got pretty much anything he wanted. Hope this helps. The article gives more details and is obviously more current. Steve ------ End of Forwarded Message ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com To unsubscribe or update your address, click http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- more on US Military cognitive dissonance hitsa new low Dave Farber (Nov 30)