Posted on 05/08/2017 1:57:15 PM PDT by iowamark
Decorated combat veteran and author Douglas Macgregor, PhD visits the Museum & Library to discuss his newest book, detailing five military battles in the 20th century. Sponsored by U.S. Naval Institute.
In Margin of Victory Douglas Macgregor tells the riveting stories of five military battles of the twentieth century, each one a turning point in history. Beginning with the British Expeditionary force holding the line at the Battle of Mons in 1914 and concluding with the Battle of 73 Easting in 1991 during Desert Storm, Margin of Victory teases out a connection between these battles and teaches its readers an important lesson about how future battles can be won.
Emphasizing military strategy, force design, and modernization, Macgregor links each of these seemingly isolated battles thematically. At the core of his analysis, the author reminds the reader that to be successful, military action must always be congruent with national culture, geography, and scientific-industrial capacity. He theorizes that strategy and geopolitics are ultimately more influential than ideology. Macgregor stresses that if nation-states want to be successful, they must accept the need for and the inevitability of change. The five warfighting dramas in this book, rendered in vivid detail by lively prose, offer many lessons on the tactical, operational, and strategic levels of war.
DOUGLAS MACGREGOR is a decorated combat veteran, the author of five books, a PhD and the executive VP of Burke-Macgregor Group LLC, a defense and foreign policy consulting firm in Reston, VA. He was commissioned in the Regular Army in 1976 after 1 year at VMI and 4 years at West Point. Macgregor retired with the rank of Colonel in 2004. He holds an MA in comparative politics and a PhD in international relations from the University of Virginia.
Macgregor is widely known in military circles inside the U.S., Europe, Israel, China and Korea for both his leadership in the Battle of 73 Easting, the U.S. Army’s largest tank battle since World War II, and for his ground-breaking books on military transformation: Breaking the Phalanx (Praeger, 1997) and Transformation under Fire (Praeger, 2003). His fourth book, Warrior’s Rage: The Great Tank Battle of 73 Easting (Naval Institute Press, 2009) describes the 1991 action for which he was awarded a Bronze Star with “V” device for valor. His books have been translated into Hebrew, Chinese, Russian and Korean.
In 28 years of service, Macgregor taught in the Department of Social Sciences at West Point, commanded the 1st Squadron, 4th Cavalry, and served as the Director of the Joint Operations Center at SHAPE in 1999 during the Kosovo Air Campaign. He was awarded the Defense Superior Service medal for his role in the Kosovo Air Campaign. In January 2002, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld insisted that General “Tommy” Franks meet with, Colonel Macgregor on 16-17 January 2002 to hear Macgregor’s concept for the attack to Baghdad. Though Macgregor’s offensive concept assumed the rapid restoration of control to the Iraqi Army and no occupation his offensive scheme of maneuver was largely adopted.
Since leaving the Army, Macgregor has worked as a consultant to advise a host of individuals and organizations including the Office of the Secretary of the Navy, the Joint Staff, Bell Laboratories, and Raytheon Corporation on issues ranging from strategic roadmaps to the integration of disruptive technologies. He has testified as an expert witness before the House Armed Services Committee, Senate Armed Services’ Air-Land Subcommittee and appeared on Fox Business, PBS News Hour, the BBC, CBC, RT, and CNN. Cameron, his oldest son, is a 2007 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy and now works as a consultant in the IT industry.
Amazon: 'Margin of Victory: Five Battles That Changed the Face of Modern War' by Douglas Macgregor
The five battles:
Mission impossible: The Battle of Mons, 1914 --
War without end: The Battle of Shanghai, 1937 --
Reversal of fortune: The destruction of Army Group Center, 1944 --
Enemy at the gate: counterattack across the Suez, 1973 --
Lost victory: Desert Storm and the Battle of 73 Easting, 1991 --
Conclusion: America's margin of victory in the twenty-first century.
Would have been interesting to see how that scenario would have played out.
Battle of Britain - Radar
Midway - Aircraft Carriers
Major battles that changed modern warfare
Battle of Trafalgar 1805
President Trump, pick up the house phone, your next nominee for Secretary of the Army is here.
I would have included Tet. A battle we won in Vietnam but the war we lost in Washington. New York. LA.
Kent State. etc.
It was there that the new formula for a mass media strategy of war on the front pages was started by the socialists.
Clearly written by a Army guy. How can you leave out the Battle of Britain and Coral Sea/Midway?
20th Century battles only. And Hampton Roads did more to change naval warfare in the 19th century.
The neocon geniuses who had Bush 43’s ear weren’t about to pass up the chance to try out their nation building theories.
I agree with your assessment. Another couple I would put forward are the Battle of Hiroshima and the Battle of Nagasaki. Only one shot fired in each, but what shots!
Significant as Midway was in the course of WWII, it was the Battle of Coral Sea (IIRC) which established the pre-eminence of the aircraft carrier. It was, I believe the first naval engagement in history in which enemy surface vessels never came in sight of each other. Midway followed shortly thereafter, but in the big picture, was as much a victory of naval intelligence as it was the carrier forces that dealt the death blows.
wrong list
here is the correct list
First Battle of the Somme 1916
Tank Battles at Khalkin Gol 1939
Crossing of Meuse by 7.Panzer 1940
Malayan Campaign 1941
Tet offensive 1968
There was never any plan for victory in Vietnam. There was nothing beyond the idea of putting on a show to prove our “resolve”.
You can see LBJ and Rob’t McNamara’s many memos to that effect in McMaster’s book on the war. Johnson was unwilling to allow a sufficient commitment to Vietnam to interfere with his Great Society domestic agenda.
Johnson was only willing to commit a fraction of what he was repeatedly told would be required to defeat the Communist conquest of South Vietnam. He had three lawyers designing his Vietnam strategy. The two Bundys and McNaughton IIRC. He had contempt for the senior military and ignored them.
I’ve always considered Coral Sea and Midway as almost one battle with a one month pause. Both were part of a response to one overall campaign by Japan consisting of diversionary attacks in New Guinea and the Aleutians followed by the main attack on Midway.
Vietnam shows that when one side fights to win, and the other fights for a draw, the former will most likely be the outcome.
Yep. LBJ was told that before the first American combat troops even landed on the soil.
He didn’t want to hear it. His #1 overriding interest was his domestic political agenda. He was willing to send thousands of Americans into a war he knew was unwinnable in the fashion he was willing to fight it. And he designed the strategy if you can even call it that.
I’d say the main hero and prophet at the time was the Marine Corps’ Wallace Greene. He was maybe the only guy who told it like it was and who refused to be intimidated by Johnson and his flunkies.
People who think that Obama is our worst President don’t realize how much Lyndon Johnson is deserving of that honor as well.
Have you read the Ian Toll books on the Pacific War? They get great reviews on Amazon. His Pacific Crucible and The Conquering Tide go from 1941 to 1944.
Hornfischer’s books on the Pacific War are gems. ‘The Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors’ is as good as a book gets.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.