“Battles Were Not Fought in Lines”: Nationalism, Industrialism and Progressivism in the American Military Discourse, 1865-1918
“Battles Were Not Fought In Lines”: Nationalism, Industrialism and Progressivism in the American Military Discourse, 1865-1918 Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Leif A. Torkelsen, A.B., M.A., J.D. Department of History The Ohio State University 2018 Dissertation Committee: Dr. Geoffrey Parker, Adviser Dr. Nathan Rosenstein Dr. Bruno Cabanes Copyright by Leif A. Torkelsen 2018 Abstract Although notably modest in size compared to its European counterparts, the United States Army was still acutely aware of the technological and tactical developments occurring overseas in the decades prior to the First World War. Nonetheless, in the years 1914-17, US military planners were stubbornly reluctant to accept the extraordinary innovations then taking place on the battlefields of Europe. Worse still, when the United States finally did enter the war, the American Expeditionary Forces (AEF) in France resisted adopting the techniques and tactics of their allies, developed in battle at such great cost. Instead, the U.S. Army’s Field Service Regulations clung to a vision of lines of riflemen, advancing in open order, overcoming all resistance with controlled rifle fire followed-up with the bayonet. Trained in such outmoded and linear tactics (“open warfare”, as Pershing called it), the American troops fighting in France needlessly suffered heavy losses. This, despite the fact that the American army possessed a modern general staff, numerous service schools and journals, military attachés and observers the world over. The reasons for this failure lay in the development of the military discourse developed by the U.S.
[Show full text]