General George W. Casey, Jr.'s Calendar Year Essay

PAGES
2
WORDS
614
Cite

¶ … General George W. Casey, Jr.'s Calendar Year 2010 Objectives vs. The Six Key Mission Areas 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review Report The Calendar Year 2010 Objectives set by General George W. Casey, Jr. define the priorities for the U.S. Army first and foremost in terms of its continued support for the U.S. mission in Afghanistan and Iraq. He also resolves to restore strategic flexibility and balance to the ability of the armed services to respond to threats. His third stated objective is in regards to the quality of life for soldiers, not simply the mission's advancement itself: "We have made great progress over the last 3 years in the quality and quantity of support we provide to our Soldiers, Civilians and Families. This year we need to consolidate and improve on the gains we have made. We will also institutionalize both a Comprehensive Soldier Fitness Program and an Army Risk Reduction and Health Promotion Program to strengthen the...

...

Implementing an army leader development strategy similarly shows a commitment to giving back to the members of the armed forces who put their lives on the line for America's safety: "We will maintain the balance between training, education, and experience in developing our force while encouraging life-long learning and development. We want to develop leaders that are competent in their core competencies yet broad enough to succeed at operations across the spectrum of conflict" (Casey 2010:2). Both the army and servicemen will benefit from this commitment to education, as soldiers will be able to use their education even after they leave the armed forces. This objective also acknowledges the fundamental truth that the military's greatest asset is its people. Casey then…

Sources Used in Documents:

The priorities of the Six Key Mission Areas 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review Report resonate with Casey's objectives, but are more specific in terms of how Casey's vision will be realized. In terms of supporting the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, it specifically notes that support is defined as organizing, training and equipping the forces for deployment in the two theaters, but shifting the balance of the focus to Afghanistan. Its plan for re-balancing notes the need to fully implement BRAC and rotational readiness as well as Casey's more generally-stated objectives such as balancing forces commitments. The objective of sustaining families is likewise similar to Casey's, but as well as improving the health of troops it also defines grievance support as critical.

The vaguest of the defined objectives, establishing an integrated management system merely resolves to establish enterprise information architecture and other generally-stated technological goals such as reforming requirements and the acquisition processes. Fostering leadership is defined in more concrete terms, such as developing specific timelines, broadening experience, and reducing backlog in terms of promoting leaders. However, the most specifically detailed of all of the requirements is creating a true 21st century Army, which involves pages of details of new weapons systems and bureaucratic reforms.

Casey's objectives are thus a scaffold, while the Six Key Mission Areas 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review Report attempts to map out how to achieve such objectives. Some areas are clearly more detailed than others in the defense review, but the focus is more upon general implementation than establishing the reasons for setting the objectives and defining the new philosophy behind the 21st century army.


Cite this Document:

"General George W Casey Jr 's Calendar Year" (2011, October 18) Retrieved April 20, 2024, from
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/general-george-w-casey-jr-calendar-year-52482

"General George W Casey Jr 's Calendar Year" 18 October 2011. Web.20 April. 2024. <
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/general-george-w-casey-jr-calendar-year-52482>

"General George W Casey Jr 's Calendar Year", 18 October 2011, Accessed.20 April. 2024,
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/general-george-w-casey-jr-calendar-year-52482

Related Documents

A significant asymmetric advantage we have continually enjoyed over the enemy has been the quality of our leaders. This is due to superior leadership development. The balance must be maintained between training, education and experience in developing the force while encouraging life-long learning and development. The Army wants to develop leaders that are competent in their core competencies. However, they must be broad enough to succeed at operations across

Army Problem Solving Models Compare and contrast the Army Problem solving model process with the rapid decision making and synchronication process (C100) The Army's problem solving model process is defined by both the Field Manual 22-100 Army Leadership and the Field Manual 101-5 Staff Organization and Operations (Chapter 5) as a detailed, seven-step process which is used by Army personnel to address battlefield dilemmas in the most effective and efficient manner possible.