Military Review English Edition January-February 2014 | Page 17

Preferring Copies
w ith No Originals

Does the Army Training Strategy
Maj. Ben E. Zweibelson, U.S. Army
Train to Fail?
“You know, I know this steak doesn’t exist. I know that when I put it in my mouth, the Matrix
is telling my brain that it is juicy and delicious. After nine years, you know what I realize?
Ignorance is bliss.”1
— Cypher

(From the motion picture The Matrix)

T

HE U.S. ARMY spends a vast amount of energy, resources, and time on training,
perpetually seeking improvements to forge a better force. The latest Army Training
Strategy (October 2012) tasks our Army to “hold commanders responsible for training
units and developing leaders through the development and execution of progressive, challenging, and realistic training.”2 This implies a shared understanding of what training is
realistic, and what is not. Although our training strategy employs the terms “training realism,” “replication,” “operational relevant training,” and “adaptive” throughout the short
document, it never defines or differentiates this lexicon. Without any contextual depth in
these myriad concepts, is it possible that due to fundamental flaws in our training strategy
we are unaware when we conduct unrealistic training instead? In other words, do we train
to fail?
Maj. Ben E. Zweibelson is a squadron executive officer for 1/2 Cavalry Regiment, USAREUR, and a graduate
of the U.S. Army School of Advanced Military Studies. He has served as a Joint Readiness Training Center
rotational planner and opposing force company commander, and he has written extensively on design thinking
and military planning. At the time of publishing, he is deployed to the Horn of Panjwai, Southern Afghanistan.
MILITARY REVIEW

January-February 2014

15