Military Transformation in United States


There is always a need to change and the military has had a fair share of that transformation need. From the ’90s, after the Soviet Union, the winning of any war became a matter of information advantage coupled with technological know-how rather than big combat machines. The strategy was paramount and imperative to succeed. This paper analyzes Ground Moving Target Indicator (GMT) and Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) as some of the shifts the military has adopted to have an advantage. It also looks at the factors that necessitated the transformation, the policies undertaken to make it a success, and the successes realized by the transformation.

Ground Moving Target Indicator (GMTI)


The GMTI is a technological development that enables the military to track moving forces on the ground in almost real-time. It involves the use of integrated technological advancements in radar, capabilities to process fast and impressive advancement of software that enables the whole process to be a success. The development of the GMTI was not brought about by a war experience by the United States army. Rather it was brought about by a fact-finding mission the army carried out during the Israeli-Arab war in 1973. The mission found out that the army from either side was losing too much combat equipment than the one deployed by the united states at that time to Europe. This set the ground for the necessity to control fighting from the ground by transferring real-time enemy positions information to soldiers to effectively have a hitting point (Dunn, et al., 2004).

The military in the long run realized the need to have information and precision of the war on the ground. This need was real as the army noted that it was bound to reduce notable time and mass in terms of the numbers of combatants on the ground and this had the overall effect of speeding up operations on the ground (Wall, 2002). This was termed the American type of war whose idea was basically to reduce uncertainty when on the ground. It has a connection with is which was involved with the need to have intelligence. In the long run, it had a superb effect to reducing deaths and injuries to soldiers associated with attacks from quarters that came as a surprise (Dunn, et al., 2004).


The army commanders having realized the imperative need for game sought to replace the previous one that had the combatants assume the position and possible reaction from the opposing forces and relative action of the friendly forces. Therefore they sought funding from the office of the secretary of defense but that proved unforthcoming. They were unrelenting in their quest and therefore they went directly to Congress to seek funding of two separate programs the air and the ground operations. This was refused and they were forced to merge their operations into one to get funding. The congress then developed a policy through its defense and homeland security committees that sought to be passed by the congress majority. It was approved and the funding for the program was released to the army for effective implementation (Chizek, 2003).

Therefore more funding was requested from the treasury through the defense committee to factor that important aspect and was included in the budget for defense in the later years in a small amount that could not explore the whole capacity of the project. When the united states went to war in Iraq in 2003 and later in Afghanistan, it was apparent to the government the need to have got as a restrictive measure to the deaths that were been experienced.

Leading Forces and Success

The leading figures for the transformation were the army generals from the air and the ground commands. They had seen the need to have ground monitoring as a measure for the unprecedented arbitrary attacks from enemies. Others were families whose setup was grossly affected by the deaths of loved ones in war and the government felt pressured by their concerns and had to agree to any suggestion that would stem that. The combatants on the ground were also in the forefront to have a policy shift towards got noting that they will have the advantage of intelligence and hence war advantage (Chizek, 2003).

Get in conjunction with other trends such as is has brought a revolution in the manner in which warfighting is conducted. Situational awareness and precision weaponry are two very important tools that define success at war. Geni has succeeded in that field and also reduced the arbitrary deaths of soldiers on the ground. Although initially seen as too costly, its advantages have surpassed the costs. Although there is a need for improvements such as better connectivity and the need for effective intelligence exploitation as provided by GMT, its success is overwhelming and the future use is looking bright with the increment in technology know-how (Asker, 2000).

Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance


It was an undertaking of the department of defense (dod). Having realized the army needed some change from the force designed to fight the Soviet Union in the ’80s, the department saw the need to tailor the army to the 21st century new threats and new technology and sophisticated weaponry. It aimed to fuse all intelligence into one, improve close and real-time surveys of the perceived and real hotspots, and carry out feasibility studies geared towards winning a particular war. The military involved in a warlike the Afghanistan and Iraq war can win on grounds of how well their activities are controlled from a particular position with intelligence to make easy their attacks (Wall, 2002).

Any war is won considering the amount of information advantage one has over the enemy. The need for information has come twofold with the advent of technological advancement and the internet. This poses new threats whose containment can only be realized if the intelligence gathered is real-time and impotent. The attack of the united states world trade center was a wake-up call for the development of useful and timely information and enemy tracking after the intelligence agency (CIA) was caught flat-footed in that attack (Wall, 2002).


The army departments and the national intelligence organs all teamed up to make this realization a reality after the 9/11 attack in the United States. The congress after a rapping of the defense and intelligence forces for their perceived negligence and incompetence factored in the appropriation for the transformation. It also ratified is as an independent body whose aim is to look for and report to the relevant departments’ issues of technological development, restructuring of the enemy, growth of deadly arsenal, and threat to the united states from particularly the technological advancements (Department Of Defense, 2002).

Leading Forces and Success

Ten years ago the security environment was quite different from the situation that we find currently. The development of technology has brought new forces and threats to the security of the world. This is especially enhanced by the advent of the digital and internet age where data is easily available and classified information for security is easily leaked and made available to the enemy (Scott, 2002). This has necessitated the government to have structures set up to improve the situation. It incorporates the efforts that the military is focusing attention to to improve their combats on the ground. It was becoming hard to get information on countries’ activities and how they affect the security of the United States in this era and hence it is important to improve our systems to meet these emerging needs. The military has succeeded in that quest with notable winning in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. Also, the deaths that were associated with blind combats like in the Soviet Union are no longer there (Asker, 2000).


The military is faced with a growing need to have sophisticated and highly unpredictable operations on the ground to win one on one combats. Technology advancement needs to be their tracking line and good intelligence the hitting point (Scott, 2002). The data collected should be analyzed and be ready as intelligence promptly to enable unprecedented occurrences of attacks. Also, soldiers need to be trained in the emerging ways through which their combats are made easy and simple gadgets that can be operated without technical assistance developed to improve that.


Asker, J. (2000). Wanted Still. Aviation Week & Space Technology, 153(17), 33-35.

Chizek, J. (2003). Military Transformation: Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance. New York: The Library of Congress. Web.

Department Of Defense. (2002). Refining allocation method for heavily stressed isr assets. Defense Information and Electronics Report, 1(1), 1.

Dunn, R. et al. (2004). Ground Moving Target Indicator: Transformation of U.S. Warfighting. New York: Northrop Grumman. Web.

Scott, A. (2002). Spy Networks Being Rebuilt for Terror War. Christian Science Monitor, 1(1), 2-4.

Wall, R. (2002). New Space-based Radar Shaped by SBIRS Snags. Aviation Week & Space Technology, 3(3), 30.

Cite this paper

Select style


DemoEssays. (2022, December 22). Military Transformation in United States. Retrieved from


DemoEssays. (2022, December 22). Military Transformation in United States.

Work Cited

"Military Transformation in United States." DemoEssays, 22 Dec. 2022,


DemoEssays. (2022) 'Military Transformation in United States'. 22 December.


DemoEssays. 2022. "Military Transformation in United States." December 22, 2022.

1. DemoEssays. "Military Transformation in United States." December 22, 2022.


DemoEssays. "Military Transformation in United States." December 22, 2022.