Chapter 5
A first step toward describing a theory of military combat is determining the basic components that constitute combat. By components we mean the set of all things, in the most fundamental sense, that can be said to make up the phenomenon of combat: the constituents that exist in all combat actions. The task is somewhat like that described by Herman Melville in his chapter on cetology in Moby Dick: "The classification of the constituents of a chaos, nothing less is here essayed."
At this point we will be describing only the components, and the relationships among them, but not how the components perform their functions. Those matters will be covered in later chapters.
5.1 APPROACH
Two approaches have been taken. One uses a top-down method based on the conventional functions of combat. The other, which we consider the more fundamental of the two, can be designated a decomposition-recomposition or bottom-up approach.
5.1.1 Top-Down Functional Approach
The top-down approach examines components from the point of view of any political entity setting out to provide the means to wage combat. This approach is useful to provide a conventional view of components and as a check against the bottom-up approach to ensure the latter does not somehow misrepresent combat as actually practiced. The micro-derived components from the bottom-up approach must mesh with the macro-derived components from the top-down functional approach. The two methods must yield compatible structures even though they entail quite different conceptual approaches.
5.1.2 Bottom-Up Decomposition-Recomposition Approach
The bottom-up decomposition-recomposition approach is the more fundamental because it relates more directly to the structure and dynamics of combat. In this method, a large number of factors (or more accurately, topics) that relate to combat were compiled from an extensive number of documentary sources and individuals. The topics, which cover every gamut of combat, were categorized and grouped, then analyzed. From this we have distilled constituents that appear at every level of combat.
The top-down approach is discussed first.
5.2 COMPONENTS AS DERIVED FROM
THE TOP-DOWN FUNCTIONAL APPROACH
Throughout history there has been strong consistency in the components that civilizations have used to wage combat. To examine these from the top-down functional approach, we start with the political entities that, at the highest level, take actions to prepare for combat. Consistent in these actions are the following: defining the threat; developing strategy, doctrine, and tactics; orienting toward goals and control; engendering the will to fight; and organizing and arming forces.
5.2.1 Defining the Threat
Political entities start with an idea in mind as to what kind of an opponent combat may have to be waged against, and where and when it may have to take place. From this they distill a definition of threat. The definition may be specific as to who and where, but more often it is framed in broad, generic terms. An alternative approach is based on the capability to operate in a variety of circumstances against many opponents, in effect against a generalized enemy. Threat definition will also indicate the general intentions ascribed to the potential opponents, such as an emphasis on aggressive or defensive action. Strategic intelligence provides a principal input to defining the threat.
5.2.2 Developing Strategy, Doctrine, and Tactics
Governments and their military establishments develop military strategies aimed at fulfilling the military role within political strategy and goals. Doctrine and tactics in conformance with military strategy are developed to guide commanders and their forces in the conduct of combat. At a lower level, techniques are developed as combat aids for individuals, crews, teams, and small units. These guidelines and techniques are codified into doctrinal, tactical, and technical documents. In modern forces these documents comprise copious volumes of words.
5.2.3 Orienting toward Goals and Control
In furtherance of Axiom 3 (achieving goals), another constituent of combat is its directed orientation toward the goals and objectives of the highest political levels—usually national or alliance levels. Achievement of these goals and objectives has particular value to the political entities. As discussed in Chapter 4, the combat objectives align with war objectives, and the values ascribed to combat outcomes align with the values of achieving the broader goals and objectives. The hierarchical system of organization and command, using directives, mission assignments, and orders, conveys the wants of the government and upper military echelons. National objectives are imposed on forces in combat through the tradition of disciplined observance of orders throughout the chain of command. While the strength of this tradition varies widely from one force to another, its effect is always present.
5.2.4 Engendering the Will to Fight
A paramount constituent of combat is the will to fight and achieve objectives. Excepting mercenaries, the will of combat forces to fight flows from the will of the highest governmental authorities and the will of the populace called on to support combat. While this normally falls under the term national will, combat forces can also be those of an entity that is not a nation in the accepted sense. The risks of warfare magnify the criticality of will as a component of combat. Governments make concerted efforts to reinforce the notion of willingness to risk life and property for the good of the whole and to overcome the natural reluctance of individuals to place themselves in harm’s way. The will to fight will rarely be symmetrical for two opponents and will vary widely for combat forces in different circumstances.
5.2.5 Organizing and Arming Forces for Combat
As stated in Axiom 3, combat potential is embodied in military forces. To create military forces with the potential to wage combat, governments draw on available manpower, material, technological, and geopolitical resources with a view of what the forces may be called upon to do in combat. The consistent patterns in organizing and arming for combat are these:
Structuring forces into units. Forces are organized into units designed to perform particular combat functions. Manning, arming, and supplying are intended to match the functions planned for the unit. The variety of functions, and hence the variety of units, has proliferated as new technology has forced increased specialization of combat units.
Organizing units into a hierarchical-lateral structure. Small units are combined in a hierarchical-lateral structure to form larger units, which in turn are combined into even larger units, this pattern repeating as necessary to reach the size needed. At each echelon, the structure as a whole is designed to be an integrated system with unitary control of the force downward from that echelon.
Establishing control through a command chain. Control of forces is accomplished through unit commanders and the missions assigned to them. The command structure is hierarchical in conformity with unit structure, and the chain of command is meant to exert unified control over the entire force from the highest level to the lowest.
Incorporating deadly and nonlethal armament. Following from Axiom 1, the weapons and equipment used to arm combat forces entail deadly means for offense and defense. Whether weaponry and doctrine emphasize offense or defense, they consistently incorporate the capability to inflict harm. There has been recent interest in adding nonlethal weapons, but even these may harm and they remain backed by lethal weapons. No national-level military force has yet been structured with only nonlethal weaponry.
Dividing resources among fighting, support, and acquiring information. Only a fraction of a military force engages in direct fighting with opposing forces. The remainder is involved in information acquisition and other forms of support to the fighting elements. Some of this comes from military forces outside the combat arena, but at all times a substantial effort within the combat area is devoted to support and information acquisition. As combat has grown more complex, the support and information functions have become increasingly important and have received a greater proportion of resources. In modern forces, only a small part of the total structure is designed for fighting. Despite this quantitative shift in resource allocation, fighting remains the critical function of combat.
Emphasizing joint operations. Differences in the physical environments in which forces operate exert a major impact on force organization, arming, and employment. Forces intended to operate at sea have always been structured differently from those intended to operate on land. The result has been the establishment of separate naval and land forces (and separate marine forces at the land-sea interface), and more recently, separate air and space forces. While this force organization may appear to segregate combat by sea, land, air, and space environments, force organization for the conduct of combat operations more commonly follows a joint system approach based on the combination of functional needs in each case.
5.2.6 Summary of Top-Down Approach
To summarize, from the top-down functional approach we can see the following components that consistently appear in combat:
• A defined threat, providing a generalized or a more specific basis for designing forces for combat.
• Strategy, doctrine, tactics, and techniques, codified as guides to the waging of combat in light of the threat.
• The will to fight, stemming from the will of governmental authorities, the willingness of the populace to support fighting, and the level of professionalism of the armed forces.
• Control of combat oriented toward higher level objectives.
• The organizing and arming of forces for combat in hierarchical patterns that are consistent historically and across all forms of government. Included in the patterns are units designed for fighting, support, acquiring information and exercising control.
In the top-down approach, we have identified factors, such as defining a threat and arming forces for combat, that fall outside our definition of combat as active fighting embedded within campaigns and wars. These national level components are part of the external context of combat, which influences what goes on within combat. This will be discussed more fully in Chapter 6.
5.3 COMPONENTS AS DERIVED FROM THE BOTTOM-UP APPROACH
The decomposition-recomposition (bottom-up) approach derives the components of combat in an entirely different manner from the top-down approach and leads to a different view of basic components. The methodology used is similar to that called reductionism, but we do not attempt to push the method as far as is often done in works of science.
The compilation of combat topics in the bottom-up approach covers a wide range of subjects, some broad in scope, some concerned with small details. The list is a mixed bag of terms relating to combat. The small sampling presented in Table 1 illustrates the variety and partial redundancy of the topics as they appear in unsorted, unorganized form. Compiling the list, categorizing and grouping the topics, and analyzing them is the decomposition part of the approach.
5.3.1 The Basic Components
Analysis of the categorized topics showed they could be organized into three fundamental, independent constituents which have a consistent relation to each other:
• Elements of combat
• Attributes of elements
• Actions of elements
These are the basic components of combat as determined from the recomposition part of the bottom-up approach.
Table 1. Sample List of Unsorted Topics Relating to Combat
|
Leadership |
Training |
Surveillance |
|
Chain of command |
Estimate of the situation |
Ballistic missile |
|
Commanders |
Combat intelligence |
Meeting engagement |
|
Objectives |
Fear of death |
Field of fire |
|
Missions |
Combat fatigue |
Squad |
|
Vehicles |
Mobility |
Weather |
|
Combat vessels |
Courage |
Trafficability |
|
Classes of supply |
Unit integrity |
Collateral damage |
|
Civil affairs |
Aircraft shelters |
Determination |
|
Landing craft |
Attack |
Unity of command |
|
Rifles |
Defense |
Cover |
|
Field fortification |
Combat uniform |
Corps |
|
Accuracy of fire |
Fire for effect |
Interoperability |
|
Bombing accuracy |
Harassing fire |
Bomb loading time |
|
Maneuver |
Culminating point |
Enemy intentions |
|
Firepower |
Suppression |
Fuel depot |
|
Dispersal |
Resupply |
Recuperability |
|
Discipline |
Combat friction |
Replenishment at sea |
|
Sea sickness |
Platoon |
Sea state |
|
Reconnaissance |
Chance |
Cislunar space |
|
Fog of battle |
Uncertainty |
Initiative |
|
Doctrine |
Morale |
Synchronization |
|
Tactics |
Ammunition |
Air superiority |
The three components of combat are defined later in the chapter. In addition, we have determined two distinct categories into which each of the element and action components can be divided:
• Physical elements and actions
• Cognitive elements and actions
Each of the three components is distinct from the others; each is an independent part of a triple-leg foundation on which all combat rests. We can envision elements, attributes of the elements, and actions down to the most minute level of combat, and we can combine the minute-level elements and actions, together with associated attributes, into agglomerations of elements and actions up to the highest levels of combat. Or, we can decompose the full scope of combat into smaller and smaller categories of elements (with their attributes) and actions, down to the smallest level. We designate this characteristic as the property of aggregation-disaggregation.
5.3.2 Cognitive and Physical Categories
The basic element and action components are either cognitive or physical. Physical elements are those that have weight and physical dimensions. The only elements that are cognitive are humans and human thoughts, and the only actions that are cognitive are those by humans. Cognitive actions work as influences on cognitive elements. Individuals in combat are simultaneously both cognitive and physical elements. They are cognitive in that they can think, convey thoughts, and can be harmed mentally; and they are physical in that they have weight and size, need to be fed and transported, and can be harmed physically. Computers using artificial intelligence may approach cognition, but are not independently cognitive. The term physical includes elements and actions that involve electromagnetic radiation, which, though it cannot be physically weighed and seen, can produce observable physical effects.
5.3.3 The Triad Relationship of the Components
The basic components have a clear-cut relationship to one another. An agent element takes an action that impacts an object element, itself, or both. (If it impacts itself, then the acting element is both agent and object.) In any case, the result alters the attributes of the object element. We call this triad relationship a combat activity. Normally, more than one object element is impacted by a combat action, and therefore the result of the action involves changed attributes of more than one object element. Moreover, there often are virtually simultaneous actions by other agent elements that also impact the object elements. For example, an enemy object element may duck to avoid the firing action of his opponent, thereby altering his own attribute to a more protected posture. He is acting as an agent element taking an action (ducking) that affects himself. From this we can derive the more generalized definition of combat activity as one or more elements each taking an action that impacts one or more other elements, or themselves, or both, thereby producing a result that changes the attributes of the impacted elements. The term "combat process," which will be discussed in the next chapter, is synonymous with "combat activity" except for the classification of the results achieved.
The object elements are not limited to elements that have been selected by the agent element. Unaimed fire, for example, can act on many elements in the area where fire is delivered. In the case of discretely acquired targets, the object elements can be in addition to, or other than, the ones targeted. In friendly fire accidents, the object elements are unintended elements of the friendly force. Object elements can be any elements of the friendly force, the enemy force, or the combat environment, and they can be intentional objects or unintentional ones.
5.3.4 Two-Sided Adversarial Nature of Combat
It follows from the axioms that combat involves two forces in opposition. The degree of opposition may be total, in the sense that the attainment of an objective by one side equates to the denial of an opposite objective by the other side; or it may be partial, in that the objectives of the two sides are not complete opposites. In either case, the two sides are in some degree of deadly contention. In war, it is possible to have more than two parties in opposition, but combat involving more than two opponents is such an aberrant case that we have not included it. It is questionable that a situation has ever arisen where three (or more) opponents have simultaneously waged combat against each other.
5.3.5 Environment: The Third Party to Combat
While combat involves two opposing parties engaging in deadly interaction, we must also identify a third party: the combat environment. This is the shared three-dimensional geophysical space and features in which the two adversarial parties wage combat. The combat environment acts as a neutral third party that affects both of the opposed parties. It is neutral in the sense that it does not "take sides" in combat, but it is not neutral in the way it can affect each side differently and the way each side may be able to exploit it to advantage.
As with the adversarial parties, the environment comprises elements with attributes, and the elements can cause actions. The nonadversarial character of the combat environment, however, gives a distinct difference to the manner in which its actions affect combat. The combat environment is not fixed during the course of combat; in addition to changes occurring naturally, it can be modified in some degree by the two sides, as for instance, when fire levels the vegetation and churns the ground.
5.3.6 Internal and External Contexts of Combat
The internal context of combat includes the two opponents and the shared combat environment. But within this internal context, combat is continually influenced by an external context which is essentially unbounded in scope, since it stretches to the national entities supporting combat on both sides and extends to a broad geophysical space far beyond the battle arena. The external context establishes the boundary conditions for combat by both sides, not only at the start of action but in more or less degree continuously throughout combat. Within the internal context, each side will be influenced primarily by its own external conditions from the national or alliance level down to the campaign level, but there will also be an influence from trying to account for the opponent’s external influences. Chapter 6 discusses the internal and external contexts in greater detail.
5.4 DISCUSSION OF THE COMPONENTS
5.4.1 Element
The component element is defined as a material or intangible thing of any kind, whether animate or inanimate, that exists in combat and can change the state of another element or itself. This includes such things as individual soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen, combat orders, plans, weapons, equipment, supplies, and the geophysical combat environment. The environment includes topographic features such as the terrain as a whole, a tree growing on the terrain, hills, airfields, roads, and buildings; oceanographic features such as the seas, islands, and reefs; and atmospheric features such as air, rain, snow, clouds, radiation from the sun, and reflected radiation from the moon. Elements may be either cognitive or physical. As noted, the only cognitive elements are individual humans, together with their thoughts and the contents of their minds. (The case of animals trained for use in combat is a limited and usually inconsequential exception.) Elements may exist as single entities (such as an individual, a rifle, a tree, or a truck) and as aggregated entities of related single elements (such as a battalion, a forest, or a convoy of ammunition trucks). However, while a group of humans, such as a platoon or the staff of a headquarters, is an aggregated physical element, it is not an aggregated cognitive element, since it cannot think as if it were a unitary whole. Each person on the platoon or staff is a separate cognitive element that works cooperatively with the others. Thus, while in the rigorous sense there are no aggregated cognitive elements, the cooperative cognitive actions taken by individuals in a well-trained unit will appear much like collective cognition.
Any categorization of individual and aggregate elements is to an extent arbitrary and case-specific. Nevertheless, designations are implicit in long-standing usage. The ammunition stored in a munitions depot is an aggregated element of similar individual elements; the equipment and personnel in a combat unit is an aggregated element composed of many like and unlike elements, all of which are, however, functionally related. A useful categorization of combat elements can be made clearer through examples. Each of the following is an element of combat:
An individual combatant is both a cognitive element and a physical element.
A rifle carried by a combatant is a physical element. The parts of an assembled rifle are not elements, but spare rifle parts supplied separately are elements.
A squad, with all of its equipment, weapons and supplies, is an aggregated physical element. The squad is not a cognitive element because it does not think as a single corporate body, but it is composed of cognitive elements (the members of the squad) who can take cognitive actions acting in concert. If the squad is diminished by loss of personnel and equipment, the reduced squad remains an aggregated element so long as it retains unit integrity.
An aircraft is a single physical element. An aircraft with its crew is an aggregated physical and cognitive element, as is the aircraft with crew plus loaded ordnance. Each crew member is a single cognitive and physical element. As with the squad example above, the crew members can take individual cognitive actions but will normally concert their mental actions.
A battle-control computer is a physical element. A separable software program that can be inserted into the computer is a separate element, and when inserted into the computer, the combined system becomes an aggregated element. Built-in nonseparable software, such as the computer’s operating system, is not an element.
A river in the combat area is an element. So are a road, a hill, a bridge, a forest, and a tree.
An area of combat terrain is a highly aggregated element. Individual topographical elements combine into a single aggregated element of terrain in the same manner as persons and equipment aggregate into a combat unit.
A battalion, a division, a corps, and a joint task force are aggregated physical elements.
The document that constitutes a written combat order is a physical element embodying cognitive meaning which may be read and understood as a cognitive action.
Radiation from the sun is a physical element, although a highly diffused one. When the radiation shines on an object, heating it and making it more visible, the radiation is taking an action. Like radiation, the earth’s magnetic field is an element.
The mental indoctrination instilled over years in the mind of a commander or any individual combatant is a cognitive element, but it is subsumed in the individual as an inseparable part of his state. An individual and his mental faculties are the same cognitive element. But an individual’s thought process (in formulating a course of action, for example) is a cognitive action, and when that individual expresses his thoughts to another (say by giving verbal instructions), he is taking a second cognitive action to influence and change the cognitive state of the other person.
5.4.2 Action
The component action is defined as an act performed by a single or aggregated element to change the state of one or more other elements, its own state, or both. (The term state is defined below.) Since actions require a small but finite time for completion, they, unlike elements and attributes, inject time flow into combat. Actions encompass every act that takes place in combat: acts by individual elements and acts by aggregated elements. A soldier (single element) using his rifle (single element) to fire a round (single element) has performed a single action, that of firing. A missile-carrying destroyer and crew (an aggregated element) firing a salvo of rockets (each rocket a single element) using all of its launchers (each a single element) has performed an aggregated action. Conversely, this aggregated action can be broken down into the many single actions involved. Thus actions, like elements, have the property of aggregation-disaggregation.
Actions have no substantive existence; they cannot be shot at, destroyed, moved, or stored. One cannot attack an action. Only elements can be attacked, destroyed, moved, or otherwise subjected to the actions of combat. Likewise, only an element can perform an action. The relationship between elements and actions is the same as that between nouns and verbs. In the grammar of combat, elements (nouns) carry out actions (verbs) against other elements or themselves. Although elements do not carry out actions against actions, elements have an indirect effect by acting against other elements that perform actions.
All actions are carried out by one element affecting another element or elements (including itself). This applies even to actions caused by environmental elements (such as the actions of raining, heating caused by the sun, and other weather-caused actions). Actions thus always have objects: action is directed upon one or more elements. In the grammar analogy, actions are transitive verbs.
Actions are either physical or cognitive. Actions which derive from thinking are cognitive, and these originate only with cognitive elements (humans). Actions by all other elements are physical (humans also perform physical actions). Every action by an animate or inanimate element (except for events attributable to acts of nature) commences with a human cognitive thought to set the action in motion, and hence every action in combat must be preceded by a cognitive action. A gun does not fire by itself and a truck does not move by itself; someone decides to have the gun fired and the truck moved. An antipersonnel mine in a minefield does not go off until a soldier makes a decision to move across the minefield. In addition to natural events, a possible exception to this principle can be included for actions attributable solely to failures of equipment, such as a computer shut-down because of battery rundown.
The following illustrate what is included within the component action:
• Deciding a course of action (a cognitive action)
• Stating a order verbally or composing it in writing (cognitive actions)
• Exhorting a unit to perform well (a cognitive action)
• Transmitting a written order; receiving a written order (both are physical actions)
• Firing one round from a weapon; firing a salvo of rounds
• Steering a boat; flying a reconnaissance mission
• Transporting a combat unit from one location to another
• Repairing a tank
• Storing intelligence information in a computer
• Capturing a terrain feature
• Destroying part or all of a bridge
• Suppressing a force
• Surrendering a force
• Snowing within the combat area
• Changing of the weather, as from clear to cloudy
• Changing of the sea state, as from calm to heavy seas
Most of these are aggregated actions. Although only the first three of the list are cognitive actions, all except the last three require cognitive actions before they can be initiated and most require additional cognitive actions to complete execution of the action. For example, the action of destroying a bridge is physical but requires the cognitive action of making a decision to have the bridge destroyed and a great many other cognitive decision actions to initiate the physical actions of transmitting orders, positioning forces, and firing weapons. The last three on the list are actions that man does not control and for which, therefore, there is no preceding cognitive input.
5.4.3 Attribute
The component attribute is defined as a qualitative or quantitative modifier of a combat element. Attributes provide the differentials that distinguish one element from another. Attributes are not in themselves either cognitive or physical, but they can modify either category of elements. When they modify elements, attributes correspond to adjectives, and when they modify actions, they correspond to adverbs. Although attributes cannot themselves be aggregated, they modify individual elements which become aggregated, and the effect is as if the aggregated element takes on the combined attributes of the many elements. To illustrate, a tank platoon (an aggregated element) comprising individual tanks each with a certain attribute of cross-country mobility becomes a platoon with essentially that same attribute of cross-country mobility. Similarly, where every member of a bomber or ship crew has the attribute of high morale, the aggregated crew displays that same attribute, but if some have high morale and others do not, the aggregated crew will display a mixed attribute.
Attributes are of three kinds:
• Spatial conditions: these are the time-space characteristics of elements, which include location in three-dimensional space at any moment of time, orientation in space (pointing this way or that, standing upright or lying down, and so on), and instantaneous motion (moving in a circle or linearly, rotating, motionless). Spatial conditions apply only to physical elements.
• Physical properties: these are descriptors of elements, both human and other, that can be stated and measured in physical terms, such as dimensions, weight, shape, configuration, composition, muzzle velocity, range, explosive force, and load-carrying capacity. Physical properties pertain only to physical elements. Properties of elements of the environment can include steepness of hills, density of foliage, heights of buildings, strength of fortifications, density of clouds, temperature, and so on.
• Qualities: these are nonphysical, subjective descriptors of both physical and cognitive elements, such as motivation, durability, reliability, slowness, vulnerability, intelligence, tractability, brevity (e.g., of orders), and manpower intensiveness. Qualities differ from physical properties in that they cannot be as specifically quantified and described, and they apply to cognitive elements as well as physical ones. They also include a sense of "goodness" or "badness," depending on the situation in which the element is operating. For example, weapons of short range in a force are generally not as good as the longer range weapons of another force; but if the short-range weapons are more accurate, they may on balance be better. Clear comprehensibility of an order is always a quality of goodness. Lack of intelligence in a commander is a bad quality. Short message transmission time is good. The will of an individual to fight can be changed from strong (good) to weak (bad). These examples show that qualities are less concrete than physical properties and spatial conditions. For some qualities, what is good in one situation may be less so or bad in another circumstance.
5.4.4 State
At any instant of time the combination of an element and its attributes is designated the state of that element. State is defined as the condition of existence at a point in time of a single or aggregated element, as determined by its cognitive and physical attributes, including its spatial condition. Every element from individual persons and individual items of materiel up to complete multinational forces has a state at any moment of time. The states of elements, both single and aggregated, will be frequently changing during combat. As perceived by combatants, the changes often appear to be continuous. The component "action" is not a part of state, but the actions of elements result in changes of state of all affected elements.
Like the three basic components, state has the property of aggregation-disaggregation. Thus, state can be aggregated by combining the states of the smallest elements into the states of larger elements, and the largest element can be decomposed into states of the smallest elements. The combination of individual element states into the state of an aggregated element is not, however, an arithmetic summation of the individual states, for, as discussed in Chapter 6, there are nonlinear effects at play.
The states of elements are changed by the triad element-action-element activities that are constantly taking place in combat. These activities have results, and the results are the changed states of the elements acted upon.
5.5 SUMMARY: BASIC COMPONENTS AND THEIR RELATIONSHIPS
This section sets forth the basic building blocks that universally constitute combat. All of combat, from the smallest granular level to the full scope of all forces engaged, can be composed from three basic components. Each of the three components is distinct from the others, but they are linked in relationships that hold consistently throughout combat. Figure 4 illustrates the relationships.
The components are:
• Elements, which are all the material and intangible things existing in combat. Elements may be cognitive (having mental capability) or physical.
• Actions, which are acts carried out by elements upon other elements or upon themselves, thereby changing the states of the elements acted on. Actions may be cognitive (stemming directly from a mental process) or physical.
• Attributes, which are descriptive modifiers of elements. Attributes are of three kinds: spatial conditions, physical properties, and qualities. The attributes of cognitive elements are limited to qualities.
There are three separate parties to every combat:
• Each of the two opposing forces, and
• The geophysical combat environment, which acts as a non-adversarial third party.
Figure 4. Relationships of Components of Combat
All of the physical and cognitive elements (as modified by their attributes) of the two opposing forces and the environment, together with all of the actions taken by elements over time to impact other elements and the results of those actions, constitute the totality of combat. This is the internal context of combat. The internal context is embedded within and continually influenced from the outset of combat until its conclusion by the external context, which extends to the highest political levels and broadest geographical areas on both sides of the conflict.
There are consistent patterns in organizing and arming for combat. Combat forces are organized by aggregating elements into functional units that are linked laterally and hierarchically into functionally oriented echelons that are controlled from the top down through a command chain responsive to the highest level. Combat forces are oriented and vectored toward the goals and strategy of the governing entity and are infused with the will of the populace and the political authorities to pursue their assigned missions at high personal risk.
The decomposition-recomposition approach provides the fundamental building blocks necessary to understand combat structure and dynamics, while the top-down functional approach provides patterns of force structuring and connects combat to the larger war picture. The two approaches are complementary and not antithetical.
The manner in which elements, actions, and attributes are structurally related, and the impact of the external context upon the internal context—sometimes constraining and sometimes impelling combat—will be taken up in the next chapter.