Don't Be Conned by the City Slickers

I'm uncomfortable with the recent focus on urban warfare. Being capable of fighting in the city must not evolve into fighting in cities being the first option we take when confronted with an enemy-held city.

Should the Army focus on urban warfare insurgencies as its priority mission in an urbanizing world?

Sure, we need to prepare for it. To the extent we have to control at least part of a city.

Where I get really uncomfortable is saying the Army should focus on urban warfare in a conventional fight.

That I'm against.

But I'm fine with an urban warfare school just as we have jungle warfare and cold weather schools without having jungle or cold weather brigades.

Indeed, I think Army engineers would be a great place to hone and house the skills of urban warfare given that engineering support to keep American troops mobile and secure in an urban environment would be necessary.

No matter how big cities get (what's beyond a "megacity?" An "ultracity?"), the first instinct should be to bypass them as much as possible--holding just the key urban terrain--and let them wither on the vine much like our island-hopping campaign in the Pacific during World War II that seized only important Japanese-held islands on the road to Japan rather than assaulting every damn one of them.