Chain Command Links Uniformed Service Senior Junior,

chain command links uniformed service senior junior, junior ranks President United States. There great levels In some ways, the individual soldiers in the field have the greatest amount of responsibility in terms of understanding and actually actuating the rules of engagement (ROE) within the limited war ideology of Vietnam. The others in the chain of command are responsible for determining their actions, as well as the overall military action of the United States in a martial encounter such as Vietnam. The individual soldiers are responsible for actually carrying them out.

For instance, when it was decided that the president of one of the Vietnamese factions was to be assassinated, it was the individual soldiers in the U.S. military that were actually accountable for doing this deed. However, there are others in the chain of command that have a utilitarian role on the battlefield that can, at times, greatly resemble that of individual soldiers. For instance, battalion commanders and division commanders may see combat -- the likelihood that the former does so is extremely high, in fact.

Still, these two positions in the chain of command and that of General Westmoreland are responsible for contriving and carrying out tactics. For the most part, it is the job of battalion commanders to lead individual soldiers in the field. They do so quite literally and are charged with taking orders from their superiors and implementing them in the theater of war. Battalion commanders can be supported in this regard from others in the chain of command, such as colonels (Moore and Galloway, 2004, p. 100).

From a tactical perspective, the battalion leaders must report the progress of their battalions (which, of course, consist of individual soldiers) to their superiors who will adjust their tactics or adhere to them accordingly. Similarly, the battalion leaders are tasked with following the orders of their superiors and making sure that their individual soldiers do so accordingly. It is because of the presence of battalion leaders and the formation of their regiment that the actions of individual soldiers are cohesive and that, once on the battlefield, the U.S.

military is able to move in unity. The division commanders during the Vietnam War were tasked with overseeing the efforts of the individual battalions that comprised specific divisions. Division commanders were key to the war efforts and to the chain of command in general because they could influence both tactical and overall strategic decision-making within this particular framework. From a tactical perspective, they were able to monitor the progress of the various battalions that were involved in their divisions.

Examples of strategies include the strategic hamlets, which largely failed due to tactical implementation and cultural failures (Friedman). In this manner they were able to gauge the tactics of the opposition, as well as to see which tactical maneuvering on the part of the U.S. proved most efficacious. However, these commanders were also responsible for transmitting this information to their superiors -- their direct superiors, of course, were generals: General William Westmoreland, to be specific.

However division commanders were critical to the rules of engagements as effected in Vietnam because they were able to transmit their information both up and down the chain of command to those in influential positions both strategically and tactically. General William Westmoreland had a critical role in the Vietnam War. He was charged with administering the strategic measures that those above him in the chain of command (Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara and President Lyndon B. Johnson) devised and thought were the most appropriate.

Furthermore, he was able to offer some input to these superiors about how to actually implement the various strategies that they instructed him to administer. Although there is no questioning the chain of command particularly when applied to the rules of engagement of a martial encounter as pivotal (and lengthy) as the Vietnam War, his input was valuable in getting the strategies of his superiors acted upon by those below him in the chain of command. Westmoreland had limited input in the tactics utilized by his subordinates.

Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara is responsible for helping to devise the strategic objectives that the actual soldiers in Vietnam are responsible for achieving. The Secretary of Defense actually works closely with the President in this regard. Moreover, he reports directly to the president about the progress or lack thereof that the American soldiers encountered in Vietnam. The Secretary of Defense is also responsible for conveying facts and communication from General Westmoreland to the President.

In this regard, the Secretary actually knows more about the actual truth taking place in Vietnam than the President does himself -- although McNamara did not always reveal this truth the public in a timely fashion (Arendt, 1972, p. 1). General Westmoreland reports this information to the Secretary,.