Seattle, San Francisco and Boston are all among the cities Army planners say they are looking at for the Futures Command. Mark T. Esper, the secretary of the Army, said that whoever is chosen to lead the command will be “not a traditional person who spent all their time in combat units, but someone who understands the acquisition process, and who understands the corporate Army.” Ten cities should be selected within the next two months as finalists for hosting the command.

The Army is making many of the changes in an effort to figure out how to fight multiple types of wars at the same time.

More than 16 years of counterinsurgency warfare has taught military leaders one thing: The burden of fighting jihadists in multiple places is unlikely to go away anytime soon. Even today, almost eight years after President Barack Obama announced the end of combat in Iraq and three years after he announced the end of combat in Afghanistan, American troops are deployed in both countries, not to mention Syria, Niger, Somalia, Libya and Mali.

But at the same time, the Army has been charged with getting ready for a possible war on the Korean Peninsula. President Trump may have agreed to one-on-one talks with North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong-un, but the Pentagon is still trying to make sure that American forces are ready for what would probably be a completely different kind of war.

General Milley, the Army chief of staff, has repeatedly expressed concern that the Army has lost what he calls its “muscle memory” of how to fight big land wars. Beyond that, Army leaders — many of them students of history — say that for almost 200 years, the Army has often gotten the first battle of major wars wrong.

In particular, General Milley has cited the ill-fated Battle of Kasserine Pass during World War II, when unprepared American troops were outfoxed and pummeled by German forces. And he has mentioned Task Force Smith, the small, poorly equipped unit mauled by North Korean troops in 1950 during the Korean War.