In discussing the OODA Loop theory on Limited War by Colonel Boyd with in the context and patterns of conflict, it appears that we as a nation have forgotten the other options dictated by previous conflicts in the works of von Clauswitz "On War" in that we are disregarding such options and scenarios entirely. In our attempt to move the human race into a different space we are also changing the theory of war in order to do so. Yet at the same time not admitting that we are not so good at it, as we are led to believe by the academics.
In fact as we see Pentagon employees in the DC Suburbs reading the Koran, Middle Eastern Culture and history books to understand the culture, that culture is becoming more adept at using our wonderful new attitude to take advantage of such efforts and new concepts of conflict. We are seeing the NATO employees in Tucson doing the same thing. We are listening to the powers that be to keep the conflict scaled down, but just enough to operate the war machine.
By using this OODA Loop theory in it's entirety, we are being manipulated into only choosing certain chess board moves by the enemy (the face-less cowards of international terrorism) and we are not using the whole track, which I might add is the first thing they teach you in motorcycle street racing class. It is as if limited war and diplomacy is being used against this strategy. Yet, at the same time we appear to be allowing these methodologies to the utmost and are failing to act decisively in many instances.
Without such threats of all out war where you annihilate your enemy into oblivion, it is becoming harder and harder to negotiate to fulfill our political will, since the enemy real or perceived does not believe that we will ever use such options. Yet we have an arsenal more than capable of doing so and a quick intense history-making event of the ultimate in destructive power to show strength has yet been seen in the last 5 decades. We are seeing un-negotiable thoughts of our foes, middle fingers high in the air and treaties that these folks have no intention on fulfilling as a matter of fact they are laughing at us and some of the larger more potentially deadly foes in our future are being trained by us and are already finding ways to counter our Future War Strategies of net-centric, blue force tracking and combat scenarios.
Why, because we are teaching them, they are helping us design ours and we are allowing loose lips to sink future ships. When we allow students to come learn nuclear physics, IT, modern materials, fluid dynamics, frequency energies and modern business tactics, they are not going back to their countries to make paper dolls and we both know it.
Thus with this said, the power struggles are lasting decades instead of swift changes to set mankind back on course, including the god forsaken horrible attributes and consequences of nuclear weapons. Surely it is not pretty or even something you want to think about. In Colonel Boyd's model which has since been adopted by our war time leadership observe, secure options and eventually act, we have in fact failed to act and failed to achieve the goals set forth to stabilize regions. Fear Factor is being replaced. We are choosing targets via military lawyers and allowing the same non-reality based thinking which has stagnated American Industry with over regulation and incessant litigation to enter the realm of wartime.
Previously and I can remember my dad an accomplished RAG Wing Fighter pilot serving in 250 combat missions in a jet over Vietnam and also eventually running his own squadron saying the fighter pilot Naval mantra; "Never give a sucker and even break, take the advantage and cheat" reason being; there are no points for second place and in case you don't get it, you are dead if you are not number one.
Mr. Von Clauswitz was quick to point out in the ideas of pre-emption that if you fail to attack your enemy as he prepares to attack you, then you do so at the expense of all you are and all you have built. We are seeing this now. This is not a debatable human trait in the study of war, it is fact of life or death, depending on the way you look at it. It is not Them VS. Us, it is not Conservative VS. Democrat. It just is, and that is the way it works. Although war is hell, and killing one's own species is nothing to be gleeful about, it is a fact of the human kind and probably innate for a reason. And to that end we must also remember that a large statement of power and force will be remembered for a while. We need to make a statement to the world and too the International Terrorists and those who wish to manipulate them to do harm to the American people that we are the United States of America, we are united and be fore warned that this nation is off limits to attack.
The best way to do this is to turn those who might harm us to glass. And let them help their people mind their own business, since it is fairly obvious that the World is once again at impasse as it is caught between fundamentalist thinking and fundamentally that is flawed, not working and unacceptable if we are to move mankind into the future and the next evolutionary step.
In Boyd's model of limited war we are to use normal combat operations to focus enemies attention, extra ordinary actions to keep enemy unbalanced and to believe that the side which has the most accurate picture should prevail? Should have, would have could have. Judging by that basic strategy it appears that we are following the OODA Loop fairly closely. And throwing in a little Sun Tzu's "cheng and ch'i", in that we are isolating our opponent's center of gravity like a teenager who takes Judo. We appear to developing mistrust of our enemy and trying to get them to break ranks and disrupt there system of organization by local and regional non-cooperation, yet while doing so we have fractionalized the enemy and therefore harder to gain access to good Intel.
We have provided increased friction and we have hopes that paralysis will set in and well it has seeing as the conflict is coming to a close and another one and another enemy lurks, so off we go again studying and failing to act, for fear of acting inappropriately. Again, fundamentalism and extremism runs deep along the common theme of the last 5000 years in the culture and we should expect few changes really? Yet we are teaching our enemy as we go. And we need to add many new plays to our playbook ASAP.
"Know your enemy and know yourself and in a 100 battles you should prevail"
Well surely a cute phrase, but actually how about one battle or no battles only one pre-emptive strike. Game over, whose next? No players, good, glad to see you are willing to adjust to our political will, the will of the Modern Free World. Boyd felt that it is better to paralyze your enemy than to annihilate them. Well said Colonel Boyd, now then, if we nuke an enemy for everyone to see then in fact paralyzing your next enemy ought to be fairly easy. On the present course we are seeing guerilla tactics play out and guerilla tactics are very straight forward.
The goal of the guerilla army is to defeat the existing regime, while simultaneously showing the regime does not have the moral right to lead. This is done often in American Politics as we are seeing from George Soro's tactics with a little bit of money in the right places. He is using a similar strategy to the corporate climb the ladder strategies of corporate power grabbing. And to that end these methods are not much different than "Primate Politics" and Jane Goodale can attest to that. Sometimes I think we are giving the human race way too much credit, when in fact the same social hierarchy is not much dissimilar than that of chimpanzees. What is most interesting is that the momentum of one party or group or tribe against the other is easily manipulated by those who study the game. As did Sun Tzu, Colonel Boyd or Carl von Clauswitz.
It is fairly obvious that the guerillas and insurgents once we leave will have little to do, so factions of them will be divided and join the new leadership of Iraq while some will remain in the fray. Either way each time you divide your political opponent on an issue, your competition by fragmenting his market and finding a niche as a foot hold or dividing your enemy you are well on your way to political victory, increased market share or winning the war and all the battles to follow. And although we are allowing the media and the election year sound bytes to make us feel questionable about being an American, I would like to point out we are in a good place in the over all scheme of things. An issue which is undetermined is if the three different sects of Islam can in fact get along or if civil war will erupt once again as it usually does during times of nation building. Will the Iranian Government fall apart or will they try to overcome their neighbor once again. Other government in the middle east are also in somewhat of a disarray. Saudi Arabia for instance and the Royal Family having issues within it's own ranks and with the masses.
Guerillas and also revolutionary components often win by stealth fast tempo strikes (like special teams on a football field although appearing and often less organized), fluidity of action (no bureaucracy to deal with), political agitation and harassing propaganda. So in the news we have clearly seen this all unfold just like described by Boyd. To fight guerillas one must play upon the grievances and appear to be understanding, caring and have empathy for such issues and deal with them through outreach of public. Meanwhile the guerillas will undermine the moral authority and right to rule of the public leadership. A regime or occupier who becomes confused is doomed to these tactics. It is interesting that our own media is suggesting that our leadership is somehow confused? Hardly, after all this is such a repeat of so many battles, conflicts and Machiavellian strategies, that it has been studied to death. And the playbook, well, so similar really, unfolding as it has 1000 times before.
Now as the media says we are cutting and running, in fact we are confusing the guerillas, proof today when a Terrorist Organization recanted and said it did not kill an American Muslim soldier after all. I would say that is proof enough. As the Guerillas try to regroup having been caught off guard twice, once with the early turn-over and again with a new enemy, their own Muslim Brothers, oh no what will they do now? In a disarray, confused, thus time once again on the side of forced stability.
If the guerillas continue to fight the new Muslim Leadership and go toe to toe with their own brothers, they will need to find a way undermine the moral authority of that new leadership and show that it is corrupt, a difficult task, if the media favors the leadership and we simply allow them to govern. There new tactics will have to be hit and run, car bombs, assignations and then re-blend into society while relying on misinformation, deception, etc. Which is a Muslim art all to it's self if you have ever tried to bargain with an open market merchant in the streets of the largest towns in the Middle East.
One thing unknown to the guerrillas is how to deal with the media now that everyone has a TV set. The new leadership only needs their own TV and radio stations, which post community events, messages, school information, health information, etc. to over come the "Mental-Moral-Physical" hold that the guerillas, insurgents and Al'Jezerez has on the people. Not difficult really and then the clerics must fall inline as well or lose support, problem only is speeding up the time table. The new government must show moral legitimacy and a little commanding around of the US Authority might look bad for our TV sets but will in fact show well to the people that the conflict is over and the rest of the minds of the people will be on Saddam's "OJ type Trail" sounds like a soap opera? Y
es, and you would not want it any other way really. I would also like to reference Colonel John Warden's thoughts on the "5-Ring Theory" of limited war. In that Boyd's premise was to physically paralyze the enemy and Colonel Warden's view was to psychologically paralyze the enemy, which is exactly what we do in modern day politics here, we character assassinate people with websites, junk science reports, innuendos, half truths, rumors, lies and continual erode the base of the opposition's support.
Next time we are put up against such a scenario we ought to level the place and forget about all this hard work with tactical nukes or the biggie. If we are desirous of having a limited war, then make it appear slow to advance and drag out the battle in the desert away from urban warfare settings as long as possible. Creating hesitation and slowing the decision making process of the enemy and drawing him into our gun sights and use a multitude of new technologies to pick them off in a long drawn out battle even if we ourselves have to drop in food to keep it going for our enemy? Unexpected various strategies could mean more practice for the next net-centric future war go around, honing our skill for the future and testing new technologies. If we are going to kill members of our own species in limited wars we may as well not make their lives depart this linear time period prematurely in vain. They can all be part of a giant experiment in the future of weaponry.
If we cannot fight a war against guerillas better then perhaps we ought to have thousands of teams of small attack units. In other words join the methods of the guerillas on a play by play basis using the same tactics they are. Can't beat them, join them scenarios. And to that end we must be certain that if they cannot beat us this time that they do not join us and join their own new political leadership structure in the new "Free Iraq" fore if they do they will ruin it from the inside out.
If the guerillas and insurgents tactics and disruptions no longer prevail maybe they will change sides to control the government through it's legitimate process. But if they do and turn it upside down again, then the only way to slow them down happens is to import our onerous, rules, unbelievable bureaucracy and some lawyers to round out a system that will protect the people by slowing down the new government to a snails pace and prevent the government from moving to fast to squash those hard earned freedoms, once again paid for by American Blood. We know this would work because this is clearly what the opposition party is trying to do in this election to the current administration, which is up for re-election now.
In business we call small start up, fast moving companies, rule breakers and big bureaucratic mature companies rule makers. This is very similar to the future of guerilla warfare, only problem is nothing gets done, mankind stagnates, everyone is born procreates and dies and the forward progress of the species is left for a future period. All that might be considered great and less bloodshed during their lifetime. But when we look at the annals of history we see that only one percent of all the people who have ever been born and walked on the surface of this little blue planet stuck between waves of gravity and linear time have ever died in a war. War therefore in the over all scheme of things is somewhat irrelevant and if we were to give it even less credence we might forego the activity all together? Perhaps in another 500 years or so?
Either way, here we stay arguing over means and using instruments of war to serve our political will. It starts with a conflict or controversy, progresses to war and then is turned over to lawyers to carry on the battle indefinitely until which time the civilization collapses under it's own weight and starts all over again under a new name, but similar ideals from whence it came.
You silly humans, it is pathetic really, it is surprising what you will believe and how you keep carrying on like this.
"Lance Winslow" - If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance; www.WorldThinkTank.net/wttbbs