This is coolbert: In previous posts, I have mentioned that to counter the threat from such potential aggressors as the old Soviet Union and North Korea, the U.S. Army adopted new policies, doctrines, strategies, tactics, etc. These changes, coupled with having a professional, better soldiery, and combined with qualitatively better weaponry, allowed the Army to do it's part in keeping the peace in hot spots where potential conflict loomed. Now, when I say better weaponry and soldiery, I am not saying that much better, I am saying just better. Even if the soldiers were not that superior, but just better, and even if the weaponry was that much superior, but just better, it added up to a big difference in totality. Small differences added up to a bigger whole in the sense that a small difference here and a small difference there, combined with superior leadership and a superior leadership knowing how to use these slight differences in a better manner go a long way to making for a superior military. A synergistic effect was taking place here. The value of the whole was greater than the sum of the individual parts. 1+1+1 does not = 3 in this case, it may equal 5! Force multipliers such as military intelligence, communication, electronic warfare, etc., also created a military that was able to deal with numerically superior threats and be confident of success.

coolbert.