Article

2009-01-15 Home Front: WoT

Strategic Collapse at the Army War College

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2009-01-15 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11129 views ] Top

#1 Fighting the war against Islamic terrorism is not something you do, it's something you "get". Until you "get it" you might get lucky and win some battles, but eventually you will lose the war.
Maybe you have to be an outsider to "get it"
Hirsi Ali certainly does:
Reason: The Polish Catholic Church helped defeat the [Wojciech] Jaruzelski puppet regime [1990]. Do you think Islam could bring about similar social and political changes?

Hirsi Ali: Only if Islam is defeated. Because right now, the political side of Islam, the power-hungry expansionist side of Islam, has become superior to the Sufis and the Ismailis and the peace-seeking Muslims.

Reason: Don't you mean defeating radical Islam?

Hirsi Ali: No. Islam, period. Once it's defeated, it can mutate into something peaceful. It's very difficult to even talk about peace now. They're not interested in peace.

Reason: We have to crush the world's 1.5 billion Muslims under our boot? In concrete terms, what does that mean, "defeat Islam"?

Hirsi Ali: I think that we are at war with Islam. And there's no middle ground in wars.

Nonetheless Hirsi Ali has no clear idea how a war with Islam might proceed. Again, from the Reason interview:

Hirsi Ali: Islam can be defeated in many ways. For starters, you stop the spread of the ideology itself; at present, there are native Westerners converting to Islam, and they're the most fanatical sometimes. There is infiltration of Islam in the schools and universities of the West. You stop that. You stop the symbol burning and the effigy burning, and you look them in the eye and flex your muscles and you say, "This is a warning. We won't accept this anymore." There comes a moment when you crush your enemy.

Reason: Militarily?

Hirsi Ali: In all forms, and if you don't do that, then you have to live with the consequence of being crushed.

Posted by tipper 2009-01-14 13:28|| 2009-01-14 13:28|| Front Page Top

#2 Quick. Let's have an inter-faith dialouge with the local mosque (sans the Hindus, Buddhists, animists etc. so as not to offend the muzzies). Afterward we can make arrangements with then fund all the muzz civil rights organizations and muslim "scholars" in the USA to teach sensititvity classes and outreach programs to the military, FBI, CIA, TSA, etc...We can rely on them to tell us all we need to know about islam's long term goals.

It worked before. Remember all the German-American Nazi Party outreach programs foisted upon the sheep dogs at the behest of the wolves?

Spit.

Our "elites" are leading us to our doom. We stand and watch. Helpless to stop it for lack of will.

Posted by MarkZ 2009-01-14 14:03|| 2009-01-14 14:03|| Front Page Top

#3 Yada Yada Yada. Folks the guys at the war college don't need a curriculum on radical Islam. They need to focus on the types of war America is fighting or will be fighting. Be it radical Islam, communist insurgents, drug cartel, etc... They need to be studying proven tactics for fighting insurgent wars on a global scale. They need to stay up on the air land battle, They need to learn how to better implement the elements of power. Understanding you enemy is critical, but its homework better suited out of school. Understanding yourself and your capabilities is more of what the war college is about, a point just as important and understanding the enemy.

At the onset of this war our leaders did not completely understand all of the elements of power and how to use the vast capabilities at their disposal. The war college must not slip into a tactical discussion of our specific enemies and their ideologies or we will have useless leaders when we have to fight the next war, where our leaders will be three and four star generals.

Posted by 49 Pan 2009-01-14 15:21|| 2009-01-14 15:21|| Front Page Top

#4 49 Pan: Did you read the whole article? Do you grasp it's implications? You're okay with a pious and practicing muslim teaching our men and women at the war college how to defeat an enemy whose core ideology is found in the koran, hadith, and sira? Is that how you think? If so, you're part of the problem. I won't take my education on islam from a practicing muslim any more than I want to take my education on communisim from the historical articles of the NYT. I say that because I see very little evidence that the people that lead us understand the threat. If they appreciate the threat they don't say because to speak the truth would be uncomfortable.

I'm not saying everybody at the war college has to "major" in the ideology of the enemy. But to "minor" in same is not necessarily a bad idea. And for those who think that is too damn burdensome, I say to you with all respect your transcript better have alot of "electives" in the history of islamic conquest and tactics.

This co*ksucker - muslim Prof. Zuhur - is teaching at the war college telling the young folk Hamas is just misunderstood. What fu*king part of "israel shall not exist" (hamas charter) do you you think our future warriors shouldn't know about in forming a battle plan and tactics? By the way, in case you have not been paying attention, Christians are next and summed up nicely in this phrase put out by muslims: "First Saturday. Then Sunday". How sweet...google it if you think I make this stuff up as I go along. Isay get your education not from a muslim but from someone who has left islam long ago. Such people are available for hire.

America is fighting an enemy unlike any faced before. Strike that. We first faced them in the late 18th century. We're fighting an enemy already behind our gates. Want a peak into the feature? Look to Europe today.

The author of the article above is trying to sound an alarm. We fail to hear it at our peril.

You say the future leaders of the military (3/4 star generals) will not be able to fight a war down the road if they get too bogged down now in the ideology of the current enemy? Who is the future enemy? Mexico? Canada? Who do you have in mind? The Ruskies? The Chicoms? I'd prefer to give greater credit to the innate intelligence of the guys on the battlefield that they can multi-task.

Do you understand the early history of the creation of what we know as the US Marines: muslim pirates. Jefferson and Adams took the time to learn about islam, they consulted with muslims. Studied islam to understand it and decided: we have to kill these muslim fu*kers. Hence: Marines. Did the leaders of the marines in 1800 know the koran backwards and forwards. Nope. But they knew enough to be "effective".

Which is what our war college is not gonna be if the people at the war college are taught by practicing muslims: "Effecetive".

Posted by MarkZ 2009-01-14 16:27|| 2009-01-14 16:27|| Front Page Top

#5 Pan, lets look at Iraq, shall we? Do they teach that you have to pay jizya to Sunnis i.e $300 dollars per month to every layabout of military age, so they will stop fighting?
Do they teach that you run dead on Iran's nuclear ambitions, to keep the Shiites quiet. Why do you think we pulled the plug on Israel, when they wanted to bomb Iranian nuclear installations? The US and allies are basically hostages in Iraq, unable to do anything other than save face. I'd say some like Petraeus have finally got "it", unfortunately not soon enough to "win"
And are you so sweet with this statement, that we appear clueless:
would a faculty member at the Army War College have even considered attempting to defend Nazi fascism or Japanese imperialism, as War College professor Sherifa Zuhur has now done with Hamas?

Posted by tipper 2009-01-14 16:34|| 2009-01-14 16:34|| Front Page Top

#6 Mark, No I cant get into the article here at work. Good point in that I should have gotten it all before commenting. My comment was based on the summery. I get off work here in a couple hours and will read it all. My point was that they have so much to learn about strategic operations that the war college is not the right venue to study Islam. There are other courses and venues for leaders to study this. Commanders can adapt to the enemy and most are students of history.

Posted by 49 Pan 2009-01-14 16:51|| 2009-01-14 16:51|| Front Page Top

#7 Mark, I'm sure the IDF and the US mil could both use your vast knowledge on the matter far more than we can. You should help us all out and direct you spittle in their direction instead of toward 49 Pan. A man who understand the topic more than you by several orders of magnitude.

And if you for one second don't think the people at the war college are blindly listening and unquestionably beleiving, I would kindly ask you to shut the fuck up altogether. At least on this subject.

Posted by Mike N. 2009-01-14 17:00|| 2009-01-14 17:00|| Front Page Top

#8 Ack! Not don't, DO!

Either way, lets just ARCLIGHT the war college.

Posted by Mike N. 2009-01-14 17:04|| 2009-01-14 17:04|| Front Page Top

#9 We have an old saying in Kentucky:
Don't piss down my back and tell me its raining.

Just because they feed them that shit doesn't mean they're going to buy it. Some muslim dude giving you his spiel on Hamas, in one ear and out the other.

Posted by bigjim-ky 2009-01-14 17:32|| 2009-01-14 17:32|| Front Page Top

#10 Hey Mike N.

Wanna make it personal? I'm okay with that . Fuck you dumbass. We happen to be on the same side but you're too stupid and parochical too realize it. I don't expect an apology but by God you owe me one.

Mr. 49 Pan stated that the folk at the war college should concentrate on learning HOW BEST to "kill the enemy". I am very much in agreement with those sentiments expressed by Mr. 49 Pan.

There is more to learning "how to kill" than just killing. You want to know something about WHY you kill the enemy or WHY they want to kill you (and yours). Is that notion too complicated? A guy named Patton was big on this notion, unlike yourself. See...Patton learned how to kill and why to kill and who to kill...and he understood the ideologie of the people he killed. That's why he could have taught at the war college.

Alow me to make an assumption: at the war college you get field experience and exercises (how to kill the enemy) AND you get classroom work...call it "background" and learning the ideology of the enemy. If you don't you should. Mikey got a problem with that? If you do you're not officer material.

The point of the article above is that at the war college OUR people are being taught to give Hamas a pass by some cocksucking muslim professor.

I'm gonna give you a pass just like I did 49 Pan and assume YOU fucking didn't read the article above because if you did AND you take issue with my comments that makes you a very fucking stupid and part of the problem. A problem we have had since 9-11 and will continue for the foreseeable future.

If you are trying to jhump down my throat becaue you think I insulted one of your brothers in arms and because I havn't "seen real combat" I say FUCK YOU. And I will say it to your face.

My post was pointed: I say the war college NEEDS to educate their officers to the THEORY of the enemy which obviously you have little or no knowlewgde of and worse yet, you don't think the students at the college are in need of. And I say it (the theory of the enemy) NEEDS to be taught by someone to our officers who can be trusted as opposed to a pious and practicing muslim professors who are really apologists for Hamas.

I say this and here I stand for I can do no other: The only gov't institution that might ever understand the enemy are those who fight the war. Do NOT allow the theory of the enemy to be taught by muslims. But it must be taught. And yes...those warriors need to be taught the theory of the enemy. Prof, Z (muzz) is not my choice. And that is not the choice of the author of the article.

You got a problem with that, Mike N. ??? Let me know. I'll give you a location, date and time and we'll meet. I'll be there. You're wrong. Any your defense of 49 Pan was not needed or warranted. He's a big boy. If 49 Pan tells me I'm wrong and explains why I'm wrong I'll listen. Otherwise. Fuck you. Best you could do was to tell me I was wrong without explaining WHY I was wrong.

Posted by MarkZ 2009-01-14 18:44|| 2009-01-14 18:44|| Front Page Top

#11 Tipper,

Pan, lets look at Iraq, shall we? Do they teach that you have to pay jizya to Sunnis i.e $300 dollars per month to every layabout of military age, so they will stop fighting?

This is standard COIN stuff. There's nothin Muslim-specific about it.

That is what Petraeus got when he got 'it'. 'It' was first and foremost an insurgency requiring a counter-insurgency strategy that uses counter-insurgency tactics, such as greasing pockets.

Posted by Mike N. 2009-01-14 20:42|| 2009-01-14 20:42|| Front Page Top

#12 umm, knowing the motivations & ideologies of one's enemy is essential not only at the tactical & operational level war but obviously critical at the strategic level not to mention as well as molding grand national strategy or the political level.

If by War College the assumption is that light birds are sitting in on this then yes, future or post Bn & Sqdrn Commanders ought to know up to the strategic level as well as what the JCS do and how they formulate policy. Even though Battalions are still considered a tactical level maneuver element, having to know what your boss two levels up is thinking and his commander's intent is pretty much officership 101.

Sure, tactics that have evolved out of say taking down fallujah house to house, guardian angels, how to really use the MRAP, EOD, etc is important, a light bird will also probably be dealing w/local strongmen - knowing the politics is important - an w/most islam from my experiences in iraq - religion is their politics. If we candy coat the facts for the sake of PC then I think we all agree that's unsat.

My $.02 anyhow. But then again, what do I know, I'm just a dumb field grade w/too big of a mouth to ever make O6.

Posted by Flease and Tenille aka Broadhead6 2009-01-14 21:07|| 2009-01-14 21:07|| Front Page Top

#13 Alow me to make an assumption: at the war college you get field experience and exercises (how to kill the enemy) AND you get classroom work...call it "background" and learning the ideology of the enemy. If you don't you should. Mikey got a problem with that? If you do you're not officer material.

Yes, Army officers should know about Islam insofar as it effects the culture they'll be operating in. Which is pretty dramatic.

The main points here are 1) that the War College has a core competency, the same as everything else and 2)it's not the only place for officers to learn it. Nor is it necessarily the best place for them to learn it. A lot of those officers will be going to parts of the world where it can't be applied and there's plenty to teach without teaching the history and current state of religions. Many of these officers will spend their entire lives learning how to better fight wars, they can't possibly cover it all in a school. Again, there's plenty of ways for these officers to study Islam and any of them that want to be succesful in the ME will do exactly that. Also worth noting is that it's not just AWC grads that need to learn this stuff.

I'm gonna give you a pass just like I did 49 Pan and assume YOU fucking didn't read the article above because if you did AND you take issue with my comments that makes you a very fucking stupid and part of the problem. A problem we have had since 9-11 and will continue for the foreseeable future.

I read the article. I found it's conclusions to be overreaching, tenuous and circumstantial.

I say this and here I stand for I can do no other: The only gov't institution that might ever understand the enemy are those who fight the war. Do NOT allow the theory of the enemy to be taught by muslims. But it must be taught. And yes...those warriors need to be taught the theory of the enemy. Prof, Z (muzz) is not my choice. And that is not the choice of the author of the article.

Again, The main points here are 1) that the War College has a core competency, the same as everything else and 2)it's not the only place for officers to learn it.

Posted by Mike N. 2009-01-14 21:35|| 2009-01-14 21:35|| Front Page Top

#14 MarkZ dear, come sit down next to me and have a nice cup of chamomile tea while we admire Broadhead6 doing whatever it is that Marines do when they aren't being better friends and worst enemies. I, too, look forward to 49 Pan's thoughts after he's had a chance to read the article and the comment thread at the link. After all, he has some small experience in that kind of thing, and it will be interesting to see which of those posters he agrees with. Come, I made enough chocolate chip cookies for everybody reading the thread, which should keep us busy for some time. :-)

Posted by trailing wife ">trailing wife 2009-01-14 21:56|| 2009-01-14 21:56|| Front Page Top

#15 TW,

I'll take your tea. Thank you, but will pass on the cookies.

I will not suffer fools lightly. Stakes are too high. I watch the news each day and see Israel getting hammered by the world unjustly. I am not amused. When our leaders learn to express the threat in no uncertain terms I will feel better. I will not be told by anybody that our military is too fucking busy with other matters to learn the depth of depravity of the enemy or the strategy and ideology of the enemy. I have children and many more nieces and nephews, none of whom I could advise in good conscience to move from these shores to a place where they cannot arm themselves. I understand the nature of the threat. When A LOT more people do, as well, then maybe I will garner a sense of contentment. Until then....I guess ...well...I'd like one lump of sugar.

Posted by MarkZ 2009-01-14 22:27|| 2009-01-14 22:27|| Front Page Top

#16 I go with what ever 49Pan says... because he really does know better than an armchair like me as to what flys.

Posted by 3dc 2009-01-14 22:29|| 2009-01-14 22:29|| Front Page Top

#17 Ok, so I read the article. My bad for not reading it but by going off the summery, a junior analyst mistake, my apologies. However, with that my comments still stand. The war college is a place where we need to focus our leaders on their strategic capabilities. We MUST teach them doctrine; expose them to the rest of the Armys Doctrine, and to the other services. COIN is a doctrinal term that Rumsfeld did not get and in my opinion why we are where we are in this war. We stopped teaching COIN and FID in our colleges. Lip service to an old Viet-Nam day. Hell the FID manual was dated 1969 and out of print in 2000. Both disciplines were long lost in our conventional schools and in our conventional branches. Petraeus did not just get it. He has a SOF background and understands COIN in depth. The key leaders before him did not. They studied Marx and communism in the colleges and fought air land battles in college, all waiting to fight the big one against the red army. At CGSC, they would fight the air land doctrine in third world countries templating tank brigades in the jungles. Jungles I later performed advisor work in, and chuckled every time I thought about M1 Abrams in rice paddies.

This whole crap about the muzzie instructor is silly and it must be a great class to attend. All the officers there have combat experience. Most have killed or lost soldiers in combat. Do not think for a minute that any of the Army officers are buying into the propaganda as doctrine. They probably study him in an effort to help counter the arguments in the field, at least thats what I would do. The best instructor is not some US officer, but get a fire breathing enemy in the class and listen to what he says and how he says it. That is where true learning will take place.

Yes, we as a nation have been at war with the Arab world since time began, as a Christian culture since the time of Christ. The comment about our next enemy seems to me a bit short sighted. The South American countries are falling like dominos. Some to Drug cartels others to drug supported dictators. It used to be a couple countries, now most are infected and falling. Mexico is placing troop near the US border to help fight the drug war. It is here on our border and the Peru and El Salvador drug gangs are here in the US. They are soldiers for a cause and are better organized, funded and armed than the countries they operate in, Mexico and the US included. Point is, their soldiers are operating in our countries at numbers that make AQ look small. FID and COIN is how we can defeat this, it is the tactic and process that will win here, and in my dumbass opinion, this is one major battlefield we need to engage in right now! So, Ya, damn straight we need to be looking to the next war. We are allowing South America to fester like we allowed Afghanistan to fester in the late eighties. When it happens we need commanders taught in principles that can affect countries without having to send in the B52s.

Our war colleges are not perfect institutions. They do produce the finest senior officers that have ever walked a battlefield on the face of this earth. I would think they have a clue as to what they are doing there and Mr. Mark Perry needs to stand back and look at the intent before running off believing we are folding to hug the radical muzzies.

Again, Mea Culpa for reading the source document first.

Posted by 49 Pan">49 Pan 2009-01-14 22:53|| 2009-01-14 22:53|| Front Page Top

#18 I'm going to back Mike N. here. I didn't go to a War College, so what I know is based on my experience.

The outrage that Sherifa Zuhur's paper is "endorsed by the Army War College" when it published her defense of Hamas is farcial, wrong, and misplaced.

One, it reinforces the notion that military officers are incapable of reading something and independently deciding its merits and deficiencies. We ain't toy soldiers.

Two, the idea that one can get an understanding of one's enemies strictly by absorbing only a viewpoint that takes a 'normal' adversarial stance, is dangerous and historically proven to be fatal.

Three, part of the objective of what any advanced leadership training is to get the leader to think, in addition to educating them them on the levels of tactics, weaponry, logistics, etc that they will use at their future commands.

I'll cite an example and leave it at that.

Part of my "Middle East familiarization" involved just having normal conversations with everyone from Egyptian engineering students, to taxi-drivers, to Saudi naval officers and sailors, to Israeli and Iranian businessmen, to Kuwaiti refugees, to Iraqi EPWs. They knew I was American; some knew I was a naval officer.

Many of the conversations were unpleasant, I got the full Arab-version of how Israel was founded, to all the usual Elders-of-Zion rote, to how they were misunderstood, to how Islam was superior. Maybe 80-90% was dross, but I also got a pretty good idea of what would work and not work in 'selling' something, whether a concept or proposal, or getting the individual to 'grant a favor'.

I'm not saying I got a clear insight. I did, however, realize that if one was to deal with a current or potential enemy, one had to approach them from all angles, even the unpalatable ones.

Posted by Pappy 2009-01-14 22:59|| 2009-01-14 22:59|| Front Page Top

#19 OPN WORLD MIL FORUM > AUSTRALIAN MEDIAS: US CONGRESSIONAL RESEWARCH OFFICE REPORT - CHINA WILL HAVE 3000-KM ANTI-CARRIER LR BALLISTIC MISSLES. ASIA-PACIFIC REGION IS NOW THE US MOST IMPORTANT STRATEGIC REGION [China = PLA desire to strike USN CBG's long before can get close to Taiwan].

versus

WMF > RUSSIAN MEDIAS: US, WORLD WILL BE HARD-PRESSED TO STOP CHINA'S NAVY [world-class = all-capable] IN 2050.

BY YEAR 2020, CHINA = PLAN/PLA will be able to support NAV-/MILOPS as per SECOND ISLAND CHAIN OF CHIN BASES = BASE/VISITATION RIGHT + CHINA's GEOPOL INTERESTS. CHINA's ASIA-PACIFIC
"ACTIVE DEFENSE" ANTI-US NAVAL, OTHER STRATEGY.

* FYI, ARTICLE > SECOND-ISLAND CHAIN = KURILES, HOKKAIDO, NANPO, NORTHERN MARIANAS [read, MICRONESIA-CENTPAC], NEW GUINEA [PNG?], PHLIPPINES + INDONESIAN + JAPANESE WATERS.

Can also add HAINAN, possibly CAM RANH BAY = VIETNAM, Spratleys + other disputed CHINA SEA islets [versus SOKOR-JAPAN], STRAITS OF MALACCAS.

* ALso on WORLD MILITARY FORUM > CHINESE ANTI-PIRACY FLEET PASSAGE INTO THE INDIAN OCEAN SHOWS THE INDIAN OCEAN DOES NOT BELONG SOLELY TO INDIA, + CHINA'S PLA, PLAN MUST PROTECT THE INDIAN OCEAN AS OVER HALF OF CHINA'S INTERNATIONAL TRADE TRAVELS/COMES THRU THE REGION.

* SAME > NEW YEAR 2009 AND BEYOND: CHINA AND EURASIA LIKELY TO FACE MORE SERIOUS MILITARY STRUGGLES WITH MILITANCIES/ISLAMISTS ALONG IRAN, AFGHANISTAN, AND PAKISTAN NEXUS.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2009-01-14 23:39|| 2009-01-14 23:39|| Front Page Top

#20 Pappy, Mike and 49Pan, thanks for your thoughts on this. I'm marking this as a classic and am carrying the article over another day in the Burg.

Posted by Steve White 2009-01-14 23:53|| 2009-01-14 23:53|| Front Page Top

#21 Thank you, gentlemen. Cookies all around, and Mike N. is buying drinks in the O Club for anyone who would care to join us.

MarkZ, I quite agree with your passion and your concern. There is too much at stake to allow getting this one wrong, and so much of what what can be seen in the sources we civilians have access to gives me nightmares as I watch the trailing daughters, formerly temporary daughter and their friends and relations reach out to take the baton from us.

Posted by trailing wife">trailing wife 2009-01-14 23:58|| 2009-01-14 23:58|| Front Page Top

#22 A few things:

First: although I understand the sentiment, 49Pan, the job is not to kill the enemy, it is to achieve Victory - defeating the enemy in the process, achieving dominance over the enemy, and destroying his will to resist. Most of the time it involves killing him in large numbers and/or demolishing his infrastructure and in the process destroying the credibility of his philosophy (c.f. Nazi Aryanism, Divine Emperor of Japan, "inevitability" of Communism, etc).

But, increasingly, there are other times where you use other methods to eliminate the enemy by destruction of the will or conversion or a mixture of those and directed violence. For example, look at the change in tactics in Iraq that came along with the surge -- by staying engaged with the locals, we defeated the enemy by turning the population against him which helped win the intelligence battle. Winning that intel battle led to killing the enemy in larger numbers (instead of the other way around).

THAT is why we have these sorts of things in places like the War College, or the Naval Post Graduate School.

That is the basis for Victory. In Iraq we are developing a sustained peace and the exclusion of the area to the enemy and its inclusion as an ally. THAT is what we hope for in a best case: defeating an enemy so completely that they become an ally.

Furthermore, this is an important subject for flag rank -- they must have a grasp of it to have a proper context for command decisions. They need the full matrix, and leaving parts of it blank is detrimental. So exposure to a wide variety of academic approaches, in addition to the best military learning mode (combat experience), is needed.

Additionally as noted, intelligence preparation of the battlefield is very important, and the Islamist nature of the opponent needs to be known and factored into possible and probable enemy actions. This is even more important for the more radical forms that we are seeing as opponents in the fields. In general, we are not fighting Sufis, we are fighting Wahabbists, Salafists and other Islamacists radicals. Their thought processes are generally alien to Westerners. As said elsewhere, many of the actions taken by the worst of their lot would be viewed as signs of severe mental illness here in the west if we had no other context.

Now my personal experience dating as far back as DLI and NPG in Monterey and duty in various AOs:

First off, having a paper like this published and defending the person publishing it is fine by me. We need an unfettered presentation from the side of the enemy, be it real or an assumed pose. Its helpful seeing what "flavor of BS" the enemy actually believes. I found that to be handy back in the day.

As Pappy cites above, Arabs in general, and especially those that are in the middle east near Israel, "know" a ton of things that simply are not so -- yet that's a fundamental part of their culture and thus colors their decision process. So this provides a great example of that particular "flavor of crazy", and helps the students learn to deal with it, and analysts learn how to anticipate decisions made from that viewpoint.

Also, speaking as a former enlisted (and later, civilian ) member of the Intelligence Community, we usually know when we are being zoomed, even in school. Its part of the (healthy skeptic) mindset you need in the IC. It is part of the job description to peek behind the scenes, to assume you are being lied to (sometimes by people who believe their own lies), and that omissions are happening -- and so you dig, learn more, and get the full picture. To use a movie quote: Improvise, adapt, overcome.

Finally, give these officers some credit. These are a select bunch and headed for flag rank; command positions. They are not generally credulous "blanket folders" when you get up to that level; they tend to be combat arms professionals (and the occaisional intel weenie or logistics/medic) who have commanded troops under fire and seen combat. Give them some credit for knowing horse-pucky when they see it.

And most of all, do not assume that because this instructor does not allow certain dicsussions in the classroom, that such discussions do not go ahead anyway outside the classroom. We are Americans, after all. We go outside the box.

OS, in absentia

Posted by Omeregum Forkbeard8103 2009-01-15 02:22|| 2009-01-15 02:22|| Front Page Top

#23 Further thoughts:

Based on what I have seen on field trips, I am not so concerned with things in the middle east and SW Asia as I once was. Yes that's stil lthe largest direct threat. But like others, I am now becoming concernce with those things in Central America and Mexico. Unlike the other AO, we have these guys at the border, and any serious mess there will cause huge repercussions from refugees to violence here in the US.

As noted above, we are already seeing things of that sort with tinpot dictators liek Chavez and narco-gangs in border areas in Mexico, and in the inner cities with gangs like MS-13.

So not only do we need to train to fight the Arab/Islamist enemy, but we also need to tend to the enemy at the gates on our southern border and already within our cities. Add to that the Chinese as well, who seem to be very active in oil producing areas, but about whom nobody seems willing to talk.

The key in any situation, as always, is to go early, with the right fulcrum, and the longest lever we can get. That lever length is mainly time. The fulcrums is technology, talent and training -- spending our treasure. The force is applied by our military; spending it means spending their blood.

The more time we have and use well, and the more treasure and talent we apply, the less blood (theirs and ours) we will need to spend to achieve victory.

The problem now is that the dominant thoughts in DC are those of Foggy Bottom and Turtle Bay: international jaw-jaw can solve the problems without a credible force to back them up. They are wasting the one thing we cannot manufacture: time. So the bill will come due and be paid in treasure and blood.

We will again pay a grievous price for deluding ourselves into thinking that talking about things makes them so.

Remember Churchill:

Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival. -- Winston Churchill

-- OS

Posted by Omeregum Forkbeard8103 2009-01-15 02:46|| 2009-01-15 02:46|| Front Page Top

#24 Alow me to make an assumption: at the war college you get field experience and exercises (how to kill the enemy) AND you get classroom work...call it "background" and learning the ideology of the enemy.

Your assumption is wrong, and displays a deep misunderstanding of the purpose of the War College as opposed to other training venues.

49Pan is correct on this, Mark Z, and has the professional background to speak knowledgeably on the subject.

Your concern that we not sell out by default is absolutely spot on. But your assumptions suggest you don't understand where the War College(s) fit into the overall process of officer training and development.

Posted by lotp 2009-01-15 06:57|| 2009-01-15 06:57|| Front Page Top

#25 Silly Pan, wearing your BDUs to a peace rally?

OS, the point of war, hot or cold, is to introduce economic instability as Regan did well with the USSR which is now a bunch of pauper states. That is accomplished by draining resources required to sustain cultural growth. The US has not yet recovered.

When there is a level playing field, i.e. battles across common cultural boundaries, a balance is struck. When cultures conflict there can be no balance. One player must destroy the other for an end to the conflict, and pour salt on the ground to prevent it's reoccurance. It is about killing, AND destroying the supportive infrastructure that allowed it to happen. Postwar Japan vs. SE Asia vs. Indonesia for examples of a success and failures.

Strategy at the War College is about the study of founding, guiding principles of 'government'/regional power so one might craft more clever strategies for their destruction. A component of the training is rolling this into patterns of KILLING. The most economically efficient (resources, bodies, effort) methods of decimation at hand. We don't care why, that gives too much credit to their cause. We do care that the outcome of any conflict has a high them:us ratio.

Up against a SW Asia culture where death is a reward this strategy is challenged and may not succeed. There is not an economy/enemy to crush.

Gaza will be an interesting study. Turn off their power, water, egress, then roll in and crush them.
It didn't work for Napoleon at Moscow, it did work at Massada, for a couple of centuries.

The COIN strategy creates a freestanding, allied, mercenary army of elitist capitalists, dependent on agency outside of the native economy and culture to flower. It introduces cash flow and an alternative commerce (standing governments get no taxes from blackmarket sales) subsidized by external forces, us. At some point of critical mass the external reinforcement is withdrawn and new fledgling economic clusters are thrown out of the nest to survive on their own, or be crushed individually, by their neighbors.

You're the man, Pan.

Posted by Skidmark 2009-01-15 07:16|| 2009-01-15 07:16|| Front Page Top

#26 tl;dr

Posted by badanov 2009-01-15 07:33|| http://www.freefirezone.org]">[http://www.freefirezone.org] 2009-01-15 07:33|| Front Page Top

#27 There is not an economy/enemy to crush.

The Apaches didn't have much of an economy to crush either. Took us a while, but unlike the Spanish and Mexicans who dealt with them before, we were able to impose our will. Part of which was to make their behaviors both extremely difficult to continue, expensive in their manpower resources to execute and to coop other Apaches to work with us.

It didn't work for Napoleon at Moscow..

Maybe because Moscow was not the administrative capital of Russia, which was St. Petersburg at the time. Certainly, not the center of gravity of the opponent.

it did work at Massada

Massada was a side show mop up operation that was done for show after the destruction of Jerusalem which fundamentally crushed the revolt against the power of Rome.

Posted by Procopius2k 2009-01-15 09:14|| 2009-01-15 09:14|| Front Page Top

#28 Skid! How you doin?? Hope Texas is treating you well. Not to rub salt into your wounds, but I rode to work today, and yesterday. Sure miss those drunken discussions, be safe.

This thread is a classic. Most don't understand COIN or FID. There is plenty of room in there for overwealming force, and when used properly will have much greater effect than rolling in with the big guns. I completely agree the only way to contain or control the Wahabi's is extreem and decisive violence. It's all they understand or all they will respect. The rest can be managed by helping to build infrastructure and surgical, violent strikes against the insurgent forces. Reward peace, bring violence at the personal level to those that disrupt it.

LOTP posted a summery of the cartels in Mexico a few months back. Absolutely the most frightening thing I have read. We can control the Islam world, with will and firepower. What is growing south of our border and in our hispanic communities is a far greater threat, as I see it. Islam is like a fist fight, ya get hit, ya beat them down and they go away for a while. The cartel issue is more like cancer and right now it is going unchecked. Now that the sums of money have gotten as large as they have, organization and order will take over. The cartels will continue to get better organized, efficient, and spread and control newer areas. We have a huge insurgency here in the US, a wall won't fix it. It might help, but wont cure it. We need to coordinate our elements of power, to include military and do for Mexico what they can not seem to do for themselves.

As far as BDU's to a peace rally, sounds fun!

Posted by 49 Pan 2009-01-15 10:05|| 2009-01-15 10:05|| Front Page Top

#29 As far as BDU's to a peace rally, sounds fun!

Might as well put them to some good use after shelling out for the ACUs that replaced them. LOL

Posted by lotp 2009-01-15 11:10|| 2009-01-15 11:10|| Front Page Top

#30 I can chip-in some fatigues toward the Halloween costume contest!!

Posted by iIleagle 2009-01-15 11:18|| 2009-01-15 11:18|| Front Page Top

#31 LOTP, I was at an embassy when the ACUs came out, . I ended up spending a grand on buying my sets. Pricey little devils.

Posted by 49 Pan 2009-01-15 11:56|| 2009-01-15 11:56|| Front Page Top

#32 A grand for ACU's? Frick. There shoulda been a raise to go along with expense increase.

Posted by Mike N. 2009-01-15 12:39|| 2009-01-15 12:39|| Front Page Top

#33 Mr. 49 Pan. I read your comments. Twice. I hope you're right.

Posted by MarkZ 2009-01-15 12:47|| 2009-01-15 12:47|| Front Page Top

#34 I've tried to stay out of this food fight but my only comment is to remind all that the Army War College is the equivalent of an Executive Leadership curriculum program "after" you have earned your MBA and have significant middle-management experience. It is strategic thinking at the senior officer level. I cannot remember anything regarding tactics or as someone posted "killing the enemy". [I taught there didn't go there]. It basically teaches Military Management and Leadership to LC's and above - there are lesser grades but under extraordinary conditions. There is a lot of abstract work and thinking - I only wish it was more Petraeus like but it isn't. It is also contrarian and the brass want the rising officer's to challenge conventional wisdom (as long as it doesn't blame the brass above them and continues to philosophize on increased funding). A lot of controversial papers, publications, lectures and such have come out of Carlisle and this is just par for the course but enough to get some dander up that normally passes for instructional thinking. Its bad but not as bad as you think. Does everyone here believe the student body at Carlisle is as naive and stupid as say the one at Berkeley?

Posted by Jack is Back">Jack is Back 2009-01-15 13:29|| 2009-01-15 13:29|| Front Page Top

#35 Good reinforcing background Pee2k.
I don't remember the drunken ones Pan.

Posted by Skidmark 2009-01-15 15:10|| 2009-01-15 15:10|| Front Page Top

#36 TW, I'm instructing future officer wannabes aka rotc at a university near you. Until they send me back to the real Corps.

this thread has gotten very interesting.

Posted by Andy Ulusoque aka Broadhead6 2009-01-15 15:27|| 2009-01-15 15:27|| Front Page Top

#37 Rantburg U! Rantburg U! Discourse! Discourse! Rantburg U!

Awesome thread. Learned a lot. SOP here at the U.

Posted by remoteman 2009-01-15 15:53|| 2009-01-15 15:53|| Front Page Top

#38 Indeed a classic thread -- you folks are incredible!

Thanks for your service. Even you retired folks still give of yourself for us folks who make up your country.

Posted by Sherry 2009-01-15 15:59|| 2009-01-15 15:59|| Front Page Top

#39 Does everyone here believe the student body at Carlisle is as naive and stupid as say the one at Berkeley?

Not at all. But I wonder exactly what lessons they are learning from this episode. Lessons about where their political leaders heads are, how they talk to them and what they talk about. Bottom line, the civilians seem to be living in a PC Fantasyland.

No one is allowed to tell the truth about the enemy in public. It's some dirty little secret only those who can figure out have to discuss surreptitiously. That is not good for a democracy when it finally has to reconcile to some tough decisions, about the ME or Mex.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2009-01-15 16:25|| 2009-01-15 16:25|| Front Page Top

#40 My 2 cents worth. We, in the Rhodesian Light Infantry, did not need to hear personally what Mugabe had to say, it was very clear that we could predict the future if he won. Maybe the emphasis of COIN these days should be looking at the damage that the 5th column inflicts, negating and losing the objective, ie, winning against third world barbarians and asstards, in a vote winning PC multi-culti swamp-fest for personal gain.

Sorry, but, if Bob stood in a room and told me his rhetoric for acting the way he does, my blood would boil. Same goes for the shoe-throwers, I know exactly why, and there's only a couple of words I need to to know that I don't want anything to do with the f*ks, "caliphate" and "sharia".

However, I do agree that one should do as Pappy has and go cloak and dagger to learn the traits of their deceit, we had guys called the Selous Scouts. Didn't help much when the West sold us out for PC values, though. And, speaking of gangs, who would infiltrate, only to be let down as per the above?

Our officers certainly did not need indoctrination by the enemy, they were only let down by politicians.

Posted by rhodesiafever 2009-01-15 18:11|| 2009-01-15 18:11|| Front Page Top

#41 rhodesiafever, you are right to point to the political leaders rather than the military. It is the national leadership that determine strategic priorities. It is the military's duty to implement those, and to give input into their creation.

Officers attend the Army's war college when they show promise towards being promoted from O-5 (Lt. Col.) to O-6 (full colonel) and beyond. Jack is Back can describe the curriculum there first hand. I'll just add that it is intended to provide senior field grade officers a venue for learning how to lead strategically, i.e. at the national security or theater level.

The point is not to give intimate knowledge of one current enemy. It is to give officers the tools to utilize our capabilities effectively against ANY threat that develops.

It is not a place to train on equipment or practice tactics and maneuvers. A good portion of the time there is spent in seminar style discussions, often lead by the attendees themselves. I like the Executive MBA analogy: the incoming officers are used to operating a business but need broadening to think analytically about business issues and to be able to discern when/how to change business strategy and focus.

Militant Islam is a serious threat to a West that has by and large lost its convictions and identity. It is not, unfortunately, the only threat we face. Agreed that the PC "Islam = peace" mantra is hypnotically self-deluding. But it's equally a mistake to concentrate only on that threat to the exclusion of others that are corrosive from within our country itself.

Keep in mind too that Carlisle Barracks is the *Army's* war college but not the *only* war college for US officers. The National War College and the National Defense University have a broader mission than Carlisle and tend to be a bit more focused on large strategic issues.

Posted by lotp 2009-01-15 19:28|| 2009-01-15 19:28|| Front Page Top

23:56 rabid whitetail
23:55 rabid whitetail
23:50 JosephMendiola
23:48 JosephMendiola
23:48 Mike N.
23:46 Dan
23:43 Mike N.
23:36 JosephMendiola
23:26 Mike N.
23:23 JosephMendiola
23:21 JosephMendiola
23:11 Silentbrick
22:58 Frank G
22:57 Grunter
22:54 49 Pan
22:52 trailing wife
22:51 49 Pan
22:50 trailing wife
22:49 trailing wife
22:47 European Conservative
22:46 trailing wife
22:45 Frank G
22:43 Frank G
22:42 European Conservative