The Modern Louisiana Maneuvers - US Army Center Of Military History

challenge of proponency (DC SOPS? DAMO-OD? -TR?
-FD?, elsewhere?) and suggests the exercise could become
annual or biennial. Sullivan Papers, Harper Papers,
Miscellaneous, Box 24, Folder 6, February 1992,
file 9. As late as 6 February 1992, Harper, in a lengthy
MFR, sub : Meeting of the Dr. Spiller Group, 5 Feb
1992, discusses LAM 1994 (para. 50 in terms of a
Single, complex, long exercise of possibly as much as
12 months' duration. (Sullivan Papers, CSA Chronicles,
Box lOB of 16, February 1992, folder 2-2, file 4.) See
LTG Peay's 12 February 1992 memorandum for
Sullivan and Reimer, sub: Louisiana Maneuvers-1994,
which responded to Sullivan's 10 January tasking to
him, same subject. Peay states explicitly (para. 2), "We
should view this as the start of a process, not just a
discrete event." (LAM TF Records, file 3-4a) . Lynn
Davis, in the 13 March 1992 letter to Sullivan cited in
n. 31 above (para. 3), assumes he had taken RAND's
suggestion that LAM be a process. Both documents in
LAM TF Files, Box 1, file 3-2c.
40 Interview, Smith with Yarrison, 28 June 1996,
pp. 4-6. The Army's functions under Title 10, U.s. Code
are to organize, man, train, equip , deploy, and sustain
Army forces for employment by the war fighting commanders-in-chief
of the unified commands.
41 Ibid., pp. 7-8. See also Briefing, "Louisiana Maneuvers
Concept," as of 21 Jan 92 with attached note
from Harper to GEN Franks, 29 January 1992, sub:
CAC Briefings, conveying Sullivan's notes on the
slide packet. In LAM TF Files, Box 1, file 3-2c. Sullivan
was at Leavenworth on 28 January to address the Pre­
Command Course class. See letter, Mr. Ronald J.
Radda to Yarrison, 18 October 1997, p. 3.
42 See quotation in Introduction, p. 6, from
Sullivan and Harper, Hope Is Not a Method, p. 169.
43 Interview, Smith with Yarrison, 28 June 1996,
pp. 7-8.
44 Ibid., pp. 9-10. See also the memorandum from
Sullivan to Peay, 10 January 1992, sub: Louisiana
Maneuvers 1994, cited in n. 36 above and Sullivan
and Harper, Hope Is Not a Method, pp. 12-13 and 169-
170.
45 Interview, Harper with Yarrison, 2 October
1996, pp. 8- 11.
46 Speech text in the Sullivan Papers, CSA Papers,
February-March 1992, Box 08B of 16, Folder 3-1,
CSA Miscellaneous Papers, February 1992, file 13.
Only a week before, he had discussed LAM in terms
of a single, complex, long (possibly 12 months) event.
See n. 34 above.
47 Interview, Sullivan with Yarrison, 29 April 1997,
pp. 11-16. See also Sullivan's letter to Mountcastle,
17 October 1997, sep. p 3. A good example of the
kinds of views Sullivan solicited and received is that
of MG Theodore G. Stroup, the Director, Program
Analysis and Evaluation, in OCSA, on 3 March 1992.
Stroup offered his advice on many facets of the proposed
LAM and the LAM TF in a wide ranging, informal
note. In LAM TF Files, Box 1, file 3-2c.
The Genesis of the Louisiana Maneuvers
48 Sullivan (in his 17 October 1997 letter to
Mountcastle, pp. 3-4) describes the situation and what
evidently was one particularly contentious exchange.
He made several points about the exchange: that all
the parties to the exchange realized their need to work
together better; that he felt that the openness such exchanges
connoted ultimately was good for him and
for arriving at the best solutions for the Army; and
that he never doubted the loyalty of the other parties.
See also Interview, GEN John H. Tilelli with Yarrison,
26 January 1998, pp. 2-4.
49 See, for example, Peay's letter to Mountcastle,
16 October 1997, pp. 2-4. See also Memorandum, lack
A. LeCuyer to BG Mountcastle, 4 December 1997,
sub: Draft History of LAMTF, pp 1-4. Historian's
files.
50 BG Nelson, the Chief of Military History, attended
the 2 March luncheon meeting on LAM and
forwarded a memo to Sullivan the next day recommending
how the Louisiana Maneuvers should be approached:
"At yesterday's meeting I asserted that we
should not begin concept development by being
derivative .... We must ask what we want to design and
build before we apply the [available] tools." (Memorandum
for Chief of Staff, Army, from Nelson, 3 March
1992, sub: "Top Down Modeling" and Louisiana Maneuvers,
in LAM TF Files, Box 1, file 3-2c.) This perspective
supported Sullivan's own and generated a
positive response on 10 March 1992. In addition, LTG
John ]. Yeosock, when briefed on the LAM concept on
3 June 1992, echoed the importance of concentrating
on operational issues. See Memorandum for Record,
COL Lee F. Greene, LAM Office, 12 June 1992, sub:
Trip Report to 3d Army, Fort McPherson, GA, 3 Jun
92, in LAM TF Files, Box 1, File 3-3b.
51 Memorandum from Peay to Sullivan and Reimer,
12 February 1992, sub: Louisiana Maneuvers -1994,
in LAM TF Files, Box 1, file 3-2c.
52 Interview, Peay with Hunt and Sherry, 18 July
1994, pp. 11-16; Peay's letter to Mountcastle, 16 October
1997, pp. 2-3.
53 Interview, Peay with Hunt and Sherry, 18 July
1994, pp. 14-16. See also VCSA Interview Questions,
General ]. H. Binford Peay III (As of 16 March 1994
- 1st Draft) , p. 5. Peay said that he first formulated
the muscle movements in April 1993, after becoming
VCSA.
54 Interview, Peay with Hunt, 23 January 1993,
p. 20.
55 Interview, LeCuyer with Yarrison, 23 October
1996, pp. 9-12; Interview, Rodgers with Yarrison, 28
June 1996, pp. 32-35, 46-50; Interview, Smith with
Yarrison, 28 June 1996, pp. 7-9, 30-31; Interview,
Blodgett with Yarrison, 15 August 1996, pp. 16, 30-
31; Interview, Harper with Yarrison, 2 October 1996,
pp. 10-12, 45-47; Interview, Sullivan with Yarrison,
29 April 1997, pp. 14-16; Interview, Harper with Richard
Hunt, 6 July 1995, pp 43-46. See Interview,
GEN John H. Tilelli with Yarrison, 23 June 1997, pp
29