Steed, a US Army officer with a degree in international relations, projects the challenges that future ground commanders will face in armed conflict, and how the US can prepare for them. Steed makes a concise and cogent argument for larger and simpler armed forces. He begins by arguing that U.S. combat power is dangerously thin on the ground and the country's advanced weapons are like a Ferrari in a bad neighborhood-one must spend more time protecting them than using them. He then cites five modern battles to prove his point, one each from Korea, Vietnam, the Falklands, the Gulf War and Somalia. In the Falklands, the British won by superior small-unit training, while in the Gulf War, U.S. armored cavalry beat an Iraqi army that gave away every possible advantage including terrain. In the other three actions, the U.S. forces inflicted more damage than they received-but not more damage than the opponent could accept. The author goes on to advocate for not only more numerous ground forces with better training and better small-unit leaders, but also a basic all-purpose fighting vehicle as versatile as the World War II Sherman tank.

A new national security focus -- Cross-tier conflict methods -- Battle analysis: the Battle of Hill 219 (Korean War, 25-26 November 1950) -- Battle analysis: the Battle of LZ Albany (Vietnam War, 17 November 1965) -- Battle analysis: the Battle of Goose Green (Falkland Islands War, 27-29 May 1982) -- Battle analysis: the Battle of 73 Easting (Operation Desert Storm, 26-27 February 1991) -- Battle analysis: the Battle of Mogadishu (Operation Restore Hope, 3-4 October 1993) -- Battle analysis: summary -- The future of warfare: trends affecting the ground commander.