Rusian Collusion

Does not exist.

The Economist View

In 1976, I completed working on the GAMO contract and spent about a year as Joe Braddock’s C3 expert in the BDM “tank”.  [The BDM tank had all the protection Hillary’s e-mails should have had.]

I didn’t know what a C3 expert was but I learned a lot about Soviet/Warsaw Pact command and control.  Bill Bell (a bagpipe player) was also in the tank along with Bernie Dunn [the D of BDM].  BDM had an exercise support contract in California.  Dan McDonald [the M of BDM] was assigned there but I met him once at the coffee pot in the tank.

The Soviets were described as “applying science to command and control.”  I came to realize that the Soviets were “taking the system approach to command and control.”  This looks good from the macroeconomic perspective expected of The Economist.  A lot of academics seem to fall for the seduction of “the optimal approach” frequently associated with socialism/communism.

American Exceptionalism was supposed to include our command and control system can cope with the situation as it evolves.  All we have to do it is get the Soviets out of their pre-planned operations.  Coping with the situation “as it evolves” is limited to the Army command and control paradigm.  The Marines have to report to the Navy.  The Navy reports to no one after the ship leaves the port.  The Air Force is very control oriented.  They are the most like the Soviets.

Decentralized Command and Control

The US Army and the Tenth Amendment have something in common.  They both are consistent with a decentralized command and control architecture.

The Russians, the Democrats, and the US Air Force are not known for decentralized command and control.  The Joint Operational Task known as Ship to Shore movement is high risk and not considered an exemplar of decentralized command and control.

It is a part of the American Exceptionalism Narrative that US Forces are superior because each individual is capable of leading the group remaining.

The opposite of decentralized command and control is centralized command and control.  Centralized command and control is associated with Specified Commands (and in my view, the US Air Force).

Specified Command is defined at http://www.militaryfactory.com/dictionary/military-terms-defined.asp?term_id=5010 as:

A command that has a broad, continuing mission, normally functional, and is established and so designated by the President through the Secretary of Defense with the advice and assistance of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It normally is composed of forces from a single Military Department. Also called specified combatant command. (JP 5-0)

A Unified Command is defined as:

A command with a broad continuing mission under a single commander and composed of significant assigned components of two or more Military Departments that is established and so designated by the President, through the Secretary of Defense with the advice and assistance of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Also called unified combatant command. See also combatant command; subordinate unified command. (JP 3-31)

General Purpose forces must deal with the situation as it is.