Three Block War = No More
- Thread starter Garett
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 4,231
- Points
- 1,160
One version is intensive fighting, peacekeeping and humanitarian aide all within three blocks of each other, all conducted simultaneously of each other and by the same blue forces. At least, that's what is was 4 or 5 years ago, last time I looked at it.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
This is ridiculous....I just bought an awesome '3 Block War' Tshirt on Cougar Salvo to impress all the ladies....now they are going to laugh at my antiquated military terminology.
Anybody know where I can get a Full Spectrum Operations shirt? I need to stay current.
Anybody know where I can get a Full Spectrum Operations shirt? I need to stay current.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
Sheerin, here is what 3 block war mean and is all about,
The Three-Block War'
This growing realization has generated a storm of debate, endless conferences and a mountain of papers. Most can be found on the Web under the search string "Urban Warfare" (incidentally, the game you'll find is great fun but the rock band is awful). Amidst all of the rhetoric, it seems clear that the Marines have grasped the nettle and are developing what might loosely be called doctrine. The former commandant of the Marine Corps, Gen. Charles Krulak, described the future of urban operations as "the three-block war," where "we can expect to be providing humanitarian assistance in one part of the city, conducting peacekeeping operations in another and be fighting a lethal mid-intensity battle in yet a third part of the city."3 The Army is rapidly catching up in the doctrinal stakes, and some of the best debate has been lead by the recently retired commandant of the Army War College, Maj. Gen. Robert Scales.4
I would really like to now who starts these tall tales, I work at CMTC and this is the cutting edge here and we do what the CDS tells us to do! We are not directed as of yet to change our training to reflect any of that, we are still geared around the 3 block war and if it has changed they might want to tell use that it is implemented, cause we here are pouring lots of cash into the 3 block war concept, and we don't want to spend unwanted dollars!!!
UBIQUE
The Three-Block War'
This growing realization has generated a storm of debate, endless conferences and a mountain of papers. Most can be found on the Web under the search string "Urban Warfare" (incidentally, the game you'll find is great fun but the rock band is awful). Amidst all of the rhetoric, it seems clear that the Marines have grasped the nettle and are developing what might loosely be called doctrine. The former commandant of the Marine Corps, Gen. Charles Krulak, described the future of urban operations as "the three-block war," where "we can expect to be providing humanitarian assistance in one part of the city, conducting peacekeeping operations in another and be fighting a lethal mid-intensity battle in yet a third part of the city."3 The Army is rapidly catching up in the doctrinal stakes, and some of the best debate has been lead by the recently retired commandant of the Army War College, Maj. Gen. Robert Scales.4
I would really like to now who starts these tall tales, I work at CMTC and this is the cutting edge here and we do what the CDS tells us to do! We are not directed as of yet to change our training to reflect any of that, we are still geared around the 3 block war and if it has changed they might want to tell use that it is implemented, cause we here are pouring lots of cash into the 3 block war concept, and we don't want to spend unwanted dollars!!!
UBIQUE
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
I am just wondering when the CF changes the name of something does the person who made the suggestion or a yes man or women who did the power point presentation get promoted? Or do they just get a pat on the back? Because it seems everything in the past 4-5 years has had a name change.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Subject: THREE BLOCK WAR / FULL SPECTRUM OPERATIONS
Reference: Record of Decision - Army Council 22/23 Feb 05
This email is sent on behalf of the COS DGLCD.
Para 21 and 33c(6) of the reference provide direction that "all training must deal with all three aspects of the '3-Block War' (full spectrum operations). This includes individual training from basic through to the CLFCSC graduate" with Comd LFDTS to have the lead. In preparation, the following is important to note.
As you know, the term "3-block war" was coined by the 31st Commandant of the Marine Corps (1995-1999), Gen Charles C. Krulak, to describe the operating environment within which forces operate today. It is not a new construct, but descriptive of a force that simultaneously, vice sequentially, conducts missions across the full spectrum of conflict - disaster relief, humanitarian aid, peace support and war fighting, etc. To this end, the USMC lists a set of missions across the spectrum of conflict where "3-block war" refers to "contingencies arising across the conflict spectrum." In this regard, the "blocks" are not treated or trained for as distinct entities; that is, they are not individually elaborated as "Block One," " Block Two" or "Block 3" missions/tasks, but viewed holistically.
From a Canadian Army doctrinal and graphical perspective, the separate block titles - 'One, Two and Three' - will not be referred to. Concurrence was expressed by CDS Action Team 3 (CAT 3), which is tasked to recommend operational capabilities in support of the CDS vision.
Lastly, the approved definition for "full-spectrum operations" is "the simultaneous conduct of operations by a force across the spectrum of conflict." The definition notes that the term is synonymous with "three block war" as defined by Gen Krulak. The term will be entered forthwith into the Defence Terminology Bank (DTB) of the Defence Terminology Programme sponsored by ADM(IM).
MB Boswell
Lieutenant-Colonel
Staff Officer Capability Development
Director General Land Capability Development
Reference: Record of Decision - Army Council 22/23 Feb 05
This email is sent on behalf of the COS DGLCD.
Para 21 and 33c(6) of the reference provide direction that "all training must deal with all three aspects of the '3-Block War' (full spectrum operations). This includes individual training from basic through to the CLFCSC graduate" with Comd LFDTS to have the lead. In preparation, the following is important to note.
As you know, the term "3-block war" was coined by the 31st Commandant of the Marine Corps (1995-1999), Gen Charles C. Krulak, to describe the operating environment within which forces operate today. It is not a new construct, but descriptive of a force that simultaneously, vice sequentially, conducts missions across the full spectrum of conflict - disaster relief, humanitarian aid, peace support and war fighting, etc. To this end, the USMC lists a set of missions across the spectrum of conflict where "3-block war" refers to "contingencies arising across the conflict spectrum." In this regard, the "blocks" are not treated or trained for as distinct entities; that is, they are not individually elaborated as "Block One," " Block Two" or "Block 3" missions/tasks, but viewed holistically.
From a Canadian Army doctrinal and graphical perspective, the separate block titles - 'One, Two and Three' - will not be referred to. Concurrence was expressed by CDS Action Team 3 (CAT 3), which is tasked to recommend operational capabilities in support of the CDS vision.
Lastly, the approved definition for "full-spectrum operations" is "the simultaneous conduct of operations by a force across the spectrum of conflict." The definition notes that the term is synonymous with "three block war" as defined by Gen Krulak. The term will be entered forthwith into the Defence Terminology Bank (DTB) of the Defence Terminology Programme sponsored by ADM(IM).
MB Boswell
Lieutenant-Colonel
Staff Officer Capability Development
Director General Land Capability Development
- Reaction score
- 2,295
- Points
- 1,160
FINALLY they rid themselves of the "Three block war". Now I'll have to go back and edit some of my posts. Anyway, as an interesting note, I was recently in Ft Knox on a gunnery visit and NOT ONE US Soldier (Officer or NCO) had even heard of the term "3 block war". FSO? Certainly!
Anyway, enough of that. Let us smoke
:evil:
Anyway, enough of that. Let us smoke
:evil:
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
vonGarvin said:
Garvin, thou hast caused coffee to be involuntarily ejected throught my nostrils...
Perhaps we should offer the CF a series of alternates to the 3 Block war that they can shift to as required by the CF Directorate of "Promotion through Designation Change":
1.FIghting in the streets and also Helping Folks ( FISHF)
2.Frontals, and CIMIC and Check Points, OH MY! (FCCOM)
3.Public Affairs Street Commandos (PASC)
4.Across the AO with Band-aid and Gun (AAOWBAG)
It's curious that in a rush to adopt US terminology that we frequently mis-quote it or change it.
In most presentations I have heard on the 3 Block War everyone in the CF (including a post above) refers to block 1 as being war-fighting. This is in fact not what Gen Krulak wrote.
â Å“On the first block of the three-block war, we will deliver humanitarian aid or assist others in doing that. On the second, we will conduct stabilization or peace support operations. On the third, we will be engaged in a high-intensity fight. We must be ready to conduct these operations simultaneously and very close to one another. We must be prepared to conduct them in large urban centres and complex terrain.â ?
I read this as not being limited to only urban settings.
But we decided that 3 Block War is not a good term for the CF. In our quest for original thought we decided on â Å“Full Spectrum Operations.â ? As vonGarvin notes some US Army personal were not familiar with the term 3 Block War. They are probably familiar with the term â Å“Full Spectrum operationsâ ? as FM 3 â “ 0 Operations published in June of 2001 defines full spectrum operations as the "range of operations Army Forces conduct in war and military operations other than war." It goes on to cover that full spectrum ops include offensive, defensive, stability, and support operations. Missions in any environment require Army forces prepared to conduct any combination of these operations.
We kill me.
In most presentations I have heard on the 3 Block War everyone in the CF (including a post above) refers to block 1 as being war-fighting. This is in fact not what Gen Krulak wrote.
â Å“On the first block of the three-block war, we will deliver humanitarian aid or assist others in doing that. On the second, we will conduct stabilization or peace support operations. On the third, we will be engaged in a high-intensity fight. We must be ready to conduct these operations simultaneously and very close to one another. We must be prepared to conduct them in large urban centres and complex terrain.â ?
I read this as not being limited to only urban settings.
But we decided that 3 Block War is not a good term for the CF. In our quest for original thought we decided on â Å“Full Spectrum Operations.â ? As vonGarvin notes some US Army personal were not familiar with the term 3 Block War. They are probably familiar with the term â Å“Full Spectrum operationsâ ? as FM 3 â “ 0 Operations published in June of 2001 defines full spectrum operations as the "range of operations Army Forces conduct in war and military operations other than war." It goes on to cover that full spectrum ops include offensive, defensive, stability, and support operations. Missions in any environment require Army forces prepared to conduct any combination of these operations.
We kill me.
- Reaction score
- 12,567
- Points
- 1,260
Nothing to fret over, the use of "Full Spectrum Operations" is just a "doctrinal scrubbing", ensuring that the proper terminology is taught in our doctrine (where terminology is king). You'll see 3-Block war in our lexicon for a long time, just not in the dictionary of doctrine.
:rocket:"Consequently, the Canadian Forces will seek to maintain the right mix of military capability to ensure that they can carry out all potential aspects of a three-block war. They will remain, above all, combat-capable in order to deter aggression, defend themselves and civilian populations against conventional and asymmetric attacks, and fight and defeat opposing forces with the ultimate goal of restoring peace and stability. The Canadian Forces have shown themselves to excel in this area, which is one of the reasons why they are in such high demand overseas. They will improve even further." - 2005 Defence Policy Statement
"The Canadian Forces and International Operations
The Canadian Forces must remain capable of participating in a wide range of operations overseas, particularly when dealing with the complex, fluid and dangerous environment of failed and failing states. These will include:
combat operations, such as those conducted during the Kosovo air campaign and with the United States in Afghanistan;
complex peace support and stabilization missions, such as those carried out with NATO in Bosnia and with the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan;
maritime interdiction operations, such as those conducted in the Persian Gulf after the first Gulf War, and as part of the campaign against terrorism;
traditional peacekeeping and observer operations, such as those carried out by the UN in the Middle East for many years, and, more recently in Ethiopia/Eritrea;
humanitarian assistance missions, such as those conducted by the Disaster Assistance Response Team in Honduras, Turkey and, more recently, Sri Lanka; and
evacuation operations to assist Canadians in countries threatened by imminent conflict and turmoil, as we have done in Haiti.
In the new security environment, the Canadian Forces could find themselves in situations where they are conducting several of these operations simultaneously in one theatre." DPS 2005
The Canadian Forces must remain capable of participating in a wide range of operations overseas, particularly when dealing with the complex, fluid and dangerous environment of failed and failing states. These will include:
combat operations, such as those conducted during the Kosovo air campaign and with the United States in Afghanistan;
complex peace support and stabilization missions, such as those carried out with NATO in Bosnia and with the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan;
maritime interdiction operations, such as those conducted in the Persian Gulf after the first Gulf War, and as part of the campaign against terrorism;
traditional peacekeeping and observer operations, such as those carried out by the UN in the Middle East for many years, and, more recently in Ethiopia/Eritrea;
humanitarian assistance missions, such as those conducted by the Disaster Assistance Response Team in Honduras, Turkey and, more recently, Sri Lanka; and
evacuation operations to assist Canadians in countries threatened by imminent conflict and turmoil, as we have done in Haiti.
In the new security environment, the Canadian Forces could find themselves in situations where they are conducting several of these operations simultaneously in one theatre." DPS 2005
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 410
I found this in Afghanistan amongst some of the US Army leaders (ARNG and Active Army) at coy lvl and below. I mentioned the term and they did not know what I was talking about, nor had they heard the term "strategic corporal". However, although they didn't know these exact terms, once explained, they fully understood the reality that these terms represent, albeit by other names.
Cheers.
