博客來This monograph is a doctrinal and historical analysis of river crossings by the United States and the Soviet Union. Initially, there is a discussion of the impact of AirLand Battle doctrine has on river crossings which concludes that the hasty crossing is the preferred method. Then there is an analysis of current U.S. doctrine as found in field manuals, professional periodicals, and as taught in service schools. This doctrinal analysis is followed by a historical analysis of the Italian, northwest European, and Korean campaigns to reveal the inadequacy of U.S. doctrine. Searching for a more adequate crossing doctrine, the author analyzes Soviet experiences during World War II. The author concludes that certain aspects of Soviet World War II crossing doctrine are applicable to the formation of a contemporary U.S. doctrine. These are: selection of multiple crossing points; avoidance of enemy strength; selection of least expected crossing locations; employment of expedient crossing methods; earlier initiation of the planning process; better trained reconnaissance forces; conduct of operations during periods of reduced visibility; and rapid continuation of the attack. This monograph is only the initial process in rewriting U.S. river crossing doctrine. It provides a point of departure for further discussion and research.
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.
