On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 20:53:21 GMT, "Kevin Brooks"
wrote:


You are getting quite far off base with this if your objective is to find an
asymetric attack method; what you are postulating plays to the US strengths,
and that is the opposite of asymetric warfare. take the advice of the others
who have already suggested the low tech approach--when you try to out-tech
the US, you will lose.

Brooks

True-- here's MY way to to Asymetric warfare.

1. Make friends with lots of congress critters. Preferably have
back up pictures of them, their best friends wife, and the sheep
should the friends approach fail.

2. Multiple survivable sattalite uplinks to media outlets to make #3
more doable.

3. The Elbonian camcorder division-- one thousand brave Elbonian
soldiers with camcorders who will be on the scene for every misguided
missile or off target artillery round, to fill CNN with visions of
widders and orphans.

4. If the U.S. is gathering to attack, don't get cute hiding WMD's,
or being coy. Unless you can reveal that you have 20 SS-18's bought
war surplus and you can kill 50 major U.S. cities with them, WMD's
have proven to be less than useless.

Many people miss the fact that the U.S. is a lot like a big, dumb,
friendly, grizzly bear. You DON't want to fight it, but honestly, the
US generally doesn't get into major fights easily-- it took 9/11 and
actions by Hussein that deserve a "stupid hall of fame" building to
get us to invade Iraq. If at any point he'd taken a variety of
actions, he'd still be sitting his fundament on his solid gold toilet
bowl.
And Phil, that's another problem with your ideas-- they assume a
government that is reasonably non-corrupt, and I can tell you from
expereicne that most 3rd world nations are run in a fashion that would
make Boss Tweed blanch.