Mineless battlespace: shaping the future battlfield without conventional landmines.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This monograph examines the ability of the United States Army to shape the battlefield without the use of conventional landmines. The United States must determine alternatives to conducting warfare without the use of landmines. The humanitarian crisis landmines create calls for this and current and future technologies make it possible. Weapons that cannot discriminate between combatant and non-combatant will lose their legitimacy in the future battlespace. This study traces the evolution of landmines and their purposes. It then reviews current American, British, and Canadian counter-mobility doctrine in order to establish a foundation to build upon. With this solid foundation of the past and present, the study then progresses to address how the United States can shape the future battlespace. This study offers alternatives to conventional landmines through technology, doctrine, and training. Through their evolution, landmines have become an effective force enabler in the conduct of land warfare, but in recent times their usefulness has diminished. Situational and scatterable landmines have increased importance in the changing environment. The evolution of the humanitarian crisis from their use supports a complete ban on the use of conventional landmines. The costs associated with landmine use are mind numbing. Medical and rehabilitation costs alone exceed $750 million. The effects of wars long past continue to plague ravished nations. With current de-mining efforts, the estimate by the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation (VVAF) to remove the existing landmines exceeds forty years. Based on this, the evidence supports a total ban on the use of conventional landmines, both anti-personnel and anti-tank. Reviewing modern doctrine reveals that countermobility operations are very similar amongst the United States, Great Britain, and Canada. The other common thread is offensive action and maintenance of the initiative. The biggest difference between these three nations is chiefly a difference in the American doctrine since it does not discuss the impacts of the Ottawa Treaty. Both Great Britain and Canada have addressed the treaty’s impacts by including coordination with host nation agreements into obstacle integration. The United States does not address this factor in countermobility doctrine. The changing security environment also presents the potential necessity to shape the battlefield without conventional landmines. The Ottawa Treaty restricts the use of anti-personnel landmines and any nations have become signatories to it. The United States Army may have to employ the objective force in a nation or with a nation that is a signatory. Should that be the case, the force will be compelled to abide the articles of the Ottawa treaty and therefore be required to replicate that capability with existing systems/doctrine or develop them. This study concludes by offering recommendations to shaping the battlefield without conventional landmines. In many respects the Untied States Army currently shapes the battlefield without the use of landmines. Doctrine provides the means to shape enemy formations. Deception combined with long range fires, including air interdiction; shape the battlefield for the decisive operations. Increased technologies mainly in the intelligence arena allow precision deep fires to destroy enemy forces prior to ground contact. Non-lethal alternatives also exist to replace the function of landmines. Electromagnetic pulse weapons could revolutionize ground warfare and leave the battlefield safe to traverse following the conflict. The recommendations outlined in this paper are based on emerging doctrine and provide for humanitarian friendly alternatives to landmines. Future battlefields can become truly mineless.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,009 | 0,012 |
| Science ouverte | 0,009 | 0,007 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,042 | 0,013 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».