The United States military may need to move away from some long-standing training practices to prepare for future conflicts, according to the commander of U.S. Special Operations Command. Speaking at the annual SOF Week conference in Tampa, Florida, Adm. Frank Bradley said adapting to new battlefield realities will require difficult decisions about how military personnel spend their limited training time.
His remarks come as the Pentagon continues efforts to reshape its forces after more than two decades of operations linked to the Global War on Terror. Military leaders are increasingly focused on preparing for challenges posed by emerging technologies, evolving threats, and potential large-scale conflicts.
Transition
Adm. Bradley said the military cannot continue adding new training requirements without removing older ones. With only a limited number of hours available for training, military leaders must determine which skills remain essential and which activities should be reduced or eliminated.
According to Bradley, future readiness will depend not only on introducing new capabilities but also on reassessing existing priorities.
“There are only so many hours in the day and so many days in the week,” Bradley said during the event. He noted that service members need adequate rest and recovery, making training time an especially valuable resource.
Rather than expanding already crowded schedules, Bradley suggested that military organizations must “creatively destroy” portions of existing training calendars to make room for emerging requirements.
Evolution
Bradley used an example from his early naval career to illustrate how military training has changed over time.
As a junior sailor, he recalled using a weighted line to measure water depth and recording results on pieces of plexiglass with grease pencils. As technology advanced, those methods gradually gave way to more modern tools and procedures.
The example highlights a broader reality facing today’s military. Techniques that were once standard may no longer provide the same value in an environment increasingly shaped by advanced sensors, autonomous systems, electronic warfare, and digital communications.
Military leaders say the challenge is identifying which traditional practices should be retained and which can be replaced without weakening operational effectiveness.
Modernization
The Pentagon has been working to modernize training programs, acquisition systems, and technological capabilities that developed during years of counterterrorism operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Many defense officials argue that future conflicts could look very different from those campaigns.
Recent military assessments have emphasized the importance of drone operations, counter-drone systems, cyber capabilities, electronic warfare, and advanced communications networks. Lessons learned from ongoing conflicts, particularly the war in Ukraine, are also influencing how the U.S. military approaches training and force development.
Military planners increasingly believe that future battlefields may involve contested communications, sophisticated surveillance systems, and rapidly changing technological environments.
Challenges
Updating training programs is often more complicated than simply introducing new courses or equipment.
Many military training requirements are tied to formal programs that can require senior-level approval before modifications are made. Additionally, some methods that appear outdated may still serve important purposes, particularly when technology fails or conditions become difficult.
As a result, military leaders must balance innovation with the need to preserve core skills.
The process requires careful evaluation because removing training elements too quickly could create capability gaps, while keeping too many legacy requirements could limit the ability to prepare for emerging threats.
Lessons
At the same conference, Gen. Frank Donovan, commander of U.S. Southern Command, discussed how assumptions formed during operations in Iraq and Afghanistan may not apply to future conflicts.
Donovan noted that military forces operating in those theaters often benefited from extensive logistical support, reliable communications, established infrastructure, and relatively predictable operating environments.
According to him, those advantages may not exist in future military operations.
He pointed to differences in regions such as the Southern Command area of responsibility, where terrain, weather, communications limitations, and infrastructure challenges can create significantly different operational conditions.
Donovan suggested that military forces must be prepared to operate with fewer resources and less certainty than they experienced during many counterterrorism campaigns.
Balance
While military leaders are emphasizing advanced technologies, they also stress that traditional military skills remain important.
Bradley said special operations forces must continue maintaining capabilities that have long defined their missions, including physically demanding activities and unconventional tactics.
For example, operators may still need to conduct difficult maritime insertions, navigate challenging terrain, and execute missions that depend on endurance, adaptability, and surprise.
The goal is not to replace foundational skills with technology but to ensure that personnel can effectively use both.
Key Points From Military Leaders
| Topic | Main Message |
|---|---|
| Training Time | Limited hours require new priorities |
| Old Methods | Some legacy practices may be removed |
| New Technology | Greater focus on drones and electronic warfare |
| Future Conflicts | Likely different from Iraq and Afghanistan |
| Human Skills | Endurance and adaptability remain essential |
| Pentagon Goals | Modernize training and force preparation |
Outlook
Military leaders across the Department of Defense are increasingly focused on preparing forces for a rapidly changing security environment. Advances in technology, shifting geopolitical challenges, and lessons from recent conflicts are prompting a broad review of how service members train and develop operational skills.
Adm. Bradley’s comments reflect a larger discussion taking place throughout the military about readiness, modernization, and resource allocation. As new technologies become more important on future battlefields, commanders face the challenge of deciding what to add, what to preserve, and what to leave behind.
The debate is expected to continue as the Pentagon works to balance traditional military competencies with the demands of emerging warfare. For military planners, the central question is no longer simply how to train more, but how to train smarter for the conflicts that may lie ahead.
FAQs
Who is Adm. Frank Bradley?
He leads U.S. Special Operations Command.
Why change military training?
To prepare for future warfare challenges.
What new skills are being emphasized?
Drones, electronic warfare, and counter-drone tactics.
What conflict offers recent lessons?
Military leaders cite the war in Ukraine.
Will traditional skills disappear?
No, leaders say they remain important.
