The United States Armed forces enjoy the most sophisticated intelligence system that enables it to detect and respond promptly to several threats. The Army has integrated technology in its operations that gives it an edge over the enemies and ensures they protect the country promptly. Secondly, the US Army enjoys high pay rates more than any other sector within the US economy. This aspect ensures that the soldiers are compensated for the amount of work they do in protecting the country, and also motivates them in their work. At the same time, the United States government has invested heavily in the Army as seen with the number of submarines and destroyers, weapons among other equipment and necessities. The Army enjoys the highest allocation of budget in the entire world with enough resources that means combat arrangements never fail.
Overall effectiveness of the US Armed Forces as a system
The purpose of the military is to serve and protect the country and all its citizens. Based on this, the effectiveness of the Army as a system lies on its ability to accomplish the objective and missions. This includes the ability to use the equipment and personnel such the weapons, tactics, and fighting as a coordinated team ( Millett, Murray & Watman, 1986) . Secondly, the overall effectiveness of the military involves converting resources into fighting the power and deriving maximum power from the available resources. Resources are essential assets to the Army that includes both human and natural resources such as political capital, governmental structure, and intellectual qualities of the military leaders ( Barno & Bensahel, 2016) . Army effectiveness is also measured by the victories that the Army achieves during its course of the purpose. The soldiers must effectively follow orders and make important decisions under pressure to achieve victory.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Obstacles in the functions and objectives of the US Army Forces
There are both natural and political barriers that affect the functioning of the US army forces. The natural limitations involve things such as population, weather, the economic system, and other physixal resources while the political obstacles involving strategic objectives, attitudes towards the military and conditions of engagement ( Millett, Murray & Watman, 1986) . These aspects can affect the effective functioning of the Army in carrying out of their missions.
The effects of Withdrawing US Troops in Afghanistan and Syria on the war on terrorism
The withdrawal of US Troops from Afghanistan and Syria has several implications on the Army mission that includes the war on terrorism. Firstly, this withdrawal affects the battlefield while creating wide-ranging geopolitical ramifications ( Japan Times, 2018) . For example, the withdrawal will leave America with few options to prevent the resurgence of Islamic State. Without their presence in the region, the IS will regroup and create an unimaginable threat to the country and other areas. The withdrawal will thus lead to the re-emergence of IS increasing the risk of terrorism and promoting a new US intervention in the countries.
At the same time, while the Islamic nation has lost its territory in Syria due to the presence of US Army, they have thousands of supporters who may carry out attacks overseas by blending with the local populations. European countries such as Britain and France have a small contingent of special operation troops in Syria, and the decision to withdraw troop s will increase the vulnerability of European nations whose Armies are still in the region. The decision would also undermine the diplomatic efforts to end the Syrian civil war while undercutting the U.S leverage in the region ( Japan Times, 2018) .
Furthermore, withdrawing the troops from Syria and Afghanistan will reinforce the influence of Russia and Iran in the region, which have been using Syria as a strategic asset in their quest to restore a global role. Therefore, the US withdraw from Syria and Afghanistan will be a victory for Russia, Iran, Turkey, and the Syrian regime while leaving Europe and the United States more vulnerable to terrorist attacks
Positives and what needs to be improved
The US Army must ensure it deters enemies from any threats while defending itself in the best manner possible. The Army has been investing in solving conflicts through diplomacy especially in countries such as Syria. However, the Eurasian countries rarely take chances and have tempted using Nuclear weapons rather than holding diplomacy talks. In this regard, the US Army needs to improve its military service to make it ready for the 21st century demands. Building the army healthy again is one way of promoting its functioning and achieves the missions ( Dilanian & Akiwowo, 2016) . There is a need to strengthen the ethics and integrity which forms the cornerstone of the Army as a profession, ensuring that soldiers do not violate the core values of the military. This is the best way to keep troops healthy and ready for any challenge. At the same time, the military can create army bases for training and improve in their tactics as a way of preparing for the increasing demands.
Findings
The study of the US Army shows that the system has significant strengths that allow it to perform effectively. However, the cases of mutating terrorism challenge the Army’s ability to create a permanent preventive measure of terrorism. Terrorists have been expanding their game, growing from one life to another and making it difficult to detect any plans. Secondly, the advancement in nuclear weapons by Eurasian countries has created a potential threat to the US army. The heavy artilleries used in the Army are also becoming outdated and needs to be replaced, since enemies have an opportunity to capitalize on this weakness and pose a danger to the nation.
Opportunities for change
The US Army has opportunities to embrace innovation and recognize revolutionary tactics and philosophies. It can formulate and implement policies that ensure the Army identifies and utilizes any arising opportunity well ( Dilanian & Akiwowo, 2016) . At the same time, the Army can adopt the use of latest weapons of attack that can help to detect and counter any cases of terrorism posed to the country. America is a superpower and can use this aspect to control the advancement of nuclear weapons by other countries and succeed in encouraging democracy in many nations. Another opportunity for change is to recruit highly trained personnel in modern technology and deploy them in the intelligence work of the military ( Dilanian & Akiwowo, 2016) . Getting highly trained personnel can help the military prepare for any cases of terrorism or attack on the country.
Conclusions
The military competence allows a country to defend itself against all domestic and foreign enemies while enabling the state to pursue and accomplish its interests. However, the US Army does not have the necessary force to carry out its duties effectively and risks its ability to be challenged by the enemy. It does not have enough resources and workforce to accomplish a specific military task and requires a considerable budget to remain powerful. In this regard, the US Army needs to adapt to the changes that take place in the internal and external environment before building an effective military capability ( Barno & Bensahel, 2016) .
References
Barno, D., & Bensahel, N. (2016, September 5). Six Ways to Fix the Army's Culture. Retrieved from https://warontherocks.com/2016/09/six-ways-to-fix-the-armys-culture/
Dilanian, A., & Akiwowo, T. (2016). Improving Army readiness for the 21st century. Retrieved from https://www.army.mil/article/169567/improving_army_readiness_for_the_21st_century
Japan Times. (2018, December 20). Planned U.S. pullout from Syria will have range of geopolitical consequences, experts say. Retrieved from https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2018/12/20/world/planned-u-s-pullout-syria-will-range-geopolitical-consequences-experts-say/#.XDGwyNIzZdh
Millett, A. R., Murray, W., & Watman, K. H. (1986). The effectiveness of military organizations. International Security , 11 (1), 37-71.
