This is a fairly lengthy read by TWW standards-- a transcript of a speech given by Robert Greene to students at West Point, discussing some interesting concepts relating to 4th generation warfare and anti-terrorism tactics.

http://www.powerseductionandwar.com/archives/the_terrorist_d.phtml

Quote :

"You, as future leaders of our military, will be at the forefront of this fight. The temptations are great: to fall for the bait, for the great knockout blow, to become obsessed with the details, the technology, the tactical back and forth. The key to me in this war, however, will always be the strategy of terror itself. That in fact is your enemy--not their warriors or fanatic leaders, but the strategy itself. In each battle you must face, you must continually return to the question of what makes this strategy tick, what is the pattern, what makes it different from everything else. Your minds are the last line of defense--it depends on your capacity to not fall for the terrorist illusion and to see the enemy's strategy as realistically as possible."

1/4/2008 2:29:38 PM

every now and then I watch/read/learn about bureaucracies and organizations and they always fascinate me

I always tend to think of almost everything as an amorphous structure... much like "terrorism".

But it is true that there are people with real agendas, strategies, and organizations, and you can fight them.

These thoughts came about from watching a thing about drug gangs last night. Although there is a drug problem that seems amorphous are are people and organizations that perpetuate that problem. In one of the programs, it was funny that the destruction of a large criminal organization (Gangster Disciples) actually generated more problems than it solved.

[Edited on January 4, 2008 at 2:41 PM. Reason : .]

1/4/2008 2:38:22 PM

Quote :

"In one of the programs, it was funny that the destruction of a large criminal organization (Gangsta Disciples) actually generated more problems than it solved. "

it creates a vacumme and consequently a power struggle that in next to impossible to control b/c its decentralized. It's comparably easier to stop a centralized operation, just cut off the head. in the smaller decentralized groups, there is no head to attack, so you're left running in circles.

It baffles me that our gov either didn't anticipate this happening, or didn't really care when going into Afg and Iraq.

1/4/2008 2:48:59 PM

Quote :

"it creates a vacumme and consequently a power struggle that in next to impossible to control b/c its decentralized. It's comparably easier to stop a centralized operation, just cut off the head. in the smaller decentralized groups, there is no head to attack, so you're left running in circles."

but more importantly is the violence that is created

all these little groups are now grabbing for power and start fighting amongst themselves

chicago became a very violent place

1/4/2008 2:51:37 PM

1/5/2008 9:25:06 AM

War On Terrorism

Let's get those towel heads yeeehawww!!!!

1/5/2008 1:39:58 PM

The main reason that we'll never win the War On Terror(tm) is that there's this attitude among our leaders and politicians that we have to be "tough" on things we don't like. We have to stay over there and take out the terrrorists because we have to show them we're tough and that we won't give up! We have to bomb the hell out of the terrorists' home countries because we're not a bunch of flaming pussies! We have to send anybody who smokes weed to prison for half of their natural life spans because they need to know we mean business! Etc, etc. And nobody will dare look for another way because in this country, good leaders always stay the course, and the current course is that we're "tough" on our enemies. Anybody who isn't "tough" on the opposition is obviously a poor leader.

1/5/2008 2:29:59 PM

yeah exactly. i mean look at europe. they are quivering at the knees of the "terrorist threat" b.c they are too pussy to be real tough men and take military action in the middle east.

1/5/2008 2:43:38 PM

Congressman: "There is no just cause for an invasion of Iraq."
Peter: "Well that may be, but what we're all forgetting is anyone that doesn't want to go to war is gay."
Congressman: "I want to go to war."
Congressman: "I want to go to war!"
All of Congress: "I want to go to war!"
Dick Cheney: "I was the first one who wanted to go to war!!!1"

1/5/2008 2:45:04 PM

Quote :

"Well that may be, but what we're all forgetting is anyone that doesn't want to go to war is gay a pussy, soft, a liberal, unpatriotic, a terrorist!!!"

[Edited on January 5, 2008 at 2:55 PM. Reason : l]

1/5/2008 2:55:31 PM

Brilliant article; well written and concise. Unfortunately it appears that no one who posted in this thread actually read it other than the OP. How TSB.

Quote :

"But in looking at something complex and fluid, we must never lose sight of the strategy itself--to stir up chaos, the worse the better. This includes: attacks on the Iraqi infrastructure, the stimulation of sectarian violence (admittedly some disagreement from within their camps about this), anything that can weaken the central government. The bait is constantly set out. A great goal of theirs would be to incite an American attack on Iran, which would greatly deepen the chaos. They are working towards laying such a trap."

Quote :

"The chances for conflict spilling over borders has been greatly increased. We might look back thirty years from now and see something similar to what had happened in Russia. In the end, if such were the case, the attack of 9/11 would have to be considered the most successful military ventures in all of history--based on the size of the attackers and the effects of their action."

Quote :

"In essence, our leaders have fought the last war. Like Hohenlohe, they are not seeing what is happening before their eyes. They are following counterinsurgency models from another era. They are seeing what they want to see, without considering the very different culture they have entered."

Exactly, which is evidenced by our incessant desire to compare this war to WWII and appeasement.

1/7/2008 11:23:21 AM

Solar energy man - it can change the world. lets get that shit fixed, and then we can move on to massive scale water desalination. lets grow the fuck up.

1/7/2008 11:34:42 AM

Is anyone else having trouble with the link?

1/7/2008 12:57:46 PM

Try this one: http://www.powerseductionandwar.com/archives//print/the_terrorist_d.phtml

1/7/2008 1:43:17 PM

Quote :

"Solar energy man - it can change the world. lets get that shit fixed, and then we can move on to massive scale water desalination. lets grow the fuck up."

so lets use an energy source that is useless when we need it most--at night

that sounds like a good idea

how about we use an energy source with 0 carbon emissions that works 24/7/365--nuclear

1/7/2008 1:46:04 PM

i like this one a lot

http://ronpaulmessage.com/banners/banner27.jpg

1/7/2008 1:47:24 PM

we should start mining antimatter from the core of the moon

1/7/2008 1:47:41 PM

Quote :

"Brilliant article; well written and concise. Unfortunately it appears that no one who posted in this thread actually read it other than the OP. How TSB."

I'm glad someone read it. I originally read it shortly after it was posted, but never got around to posting it here (and I knew that given the fact that it's at least a 15 minute read, few would actually read it). That article has almost completely re-shaped my views on this war. Especially compelling to me were how Greene drew multiple parallels between our current strategic blunders and similar blunders in history.



also relevant:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_generation_warfare

1/7/2008 11:56:46 PM

This is hardly a NEW insight...it's just that it's counterintuitive to most people who think that the only way to get better results is to just keep hitting the problem more and more viciously.

now, this is not to be confused with troop levels--rather, the conduct of operations.

1/8/2008 12:19:06 AM

If it was anyone else saying we should try and see the enemy's perspective and that it was our own stupidity that is resulting in the failure to defeat terrorism, you'd see people on the right shouting that they hate America and if they don't like it they get git out.

1/8/2008 1:53:44 AM

^^ it may not be new, but maybe "rare" is a better word.

^ typically such rhetoric involves, it's america's fault that they attacked us.

1/8/2008 8:14:23 AM

Yeah, the article certainly didn't imply that this way of thinking was new, just that it is a system that seems to require periodic re-learning.

1/8/2008 9:41:20 AM

That was a VERY interesting read and certainly a perspective that does not get enough attention these days. Thanks for posting it.

1/8/2008 10:43:08 AM

^^^^ there is a big difference between the focus of that article and 99% of the people you see saying what you're saying.

the major point of that article is that it's instinctual to be progressively less judicious in dropping the hammer as things don't go the way you want in warfare, but that such a mentality plays right into one of the major mechanisms by which this sort of insurgency works. That is NOT to say that less is more in every aspect of our involvement in this conflict, but that we need to be careful not to overplay our hand, as it's very easy to do with the capabilities we have and the what our military is really designed to do.

[Edited on January 8, 2008 at 5:07 PM. Reason : In short, it's saying that you have to be careful not to be a bull in a china shop]

1/8/2008 5:07:10 PM