This project performs a style analysis of three sentences from three military manuals written across an 80 year time-period. I first discuss the history of style within academic discourse and how it has impacted the study of style within the field of writing and rhetoric. Using this background, I then analyze five separate style manuals and compare their recommendations against one another to find similarities and differences as to what makes for a good or weak sentence. I then apply these characteristics to the sentences as they appear in the military manuals in order to make a determination on the quality of writing within these manuals. As one of the manuals being reviewed is the Army’s own style guide for doctrine publications, I interrogate the qualities of writing that this manual seeks to elucidate, and then see if actual doctrine publications meet those goals. In reviewing the sentences, I find that they do not, and that the quality of sentences in military doctrine has gone from poor to decent, and then to worse over the course of time.