asymetric warfare

In message , phil hunt
writes
On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 20:40:27 -0800, Steve Hix sehix@NOSPAM
speakeasy.netINVALID wrote:
One problem here; totalitarian regimes tend not to tolerate lots of
initiative in their underlings, which makes preparing for this sort of
fighting somewhat harder.

True, but there are exceptions, Nazi Germany being an obvious one.

The Wehrmacht had a good system of mission command at company level and
below, but was absolutely devoid of initiative at the operational level:
witness Hitler's orders that forbade any retreat under any
circumstances, even a false withdrawal to draw the enemy into a prepared
killing zone being forbidden (to say nothing of 'move it or lose it'
escapes)

It was obvious as early as 1940 (the Luftwaffe's fighters are most
effective high above the bombers they're protecting, but the bomber
crews want to _see_ their escorts, so the fighters get ordered to fly
slow weaves next to the bombers) and continued through the war.

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 22:32:24 +0000, Paul J. Adam wrote:
In message , phil hunt
writes
On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 20:40:27 -0800, Steve Hix sehix@NOSPAM
speakeasy.netINVALID wrote:
One problem here; totalitarian regimes tend not to tolerate lots of
initiative in their underlings, which makes preparing for this sort of
fighting somewhat harder.

True, but there are exceptions, Nazi Germany being an obvious one.

The Wehrmacht had a good system of mission command at company level and
below, but was absolutely devoid of initiative at the operational level:

True, particularly as the war went on.

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: , but first subtract 275 and reverse
the last two letters).

"Paul J. Adam" wrote in

When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Where does this quote come from?

"a425couple" wrote:


"Paul J. Adam" wrote in

When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Where does this quote come from?

Churchill one would assume...
--

-Gord.

In article ,
"Gord Beaman" ) writes:
"a425couple" wrote:


"Paul J. Adam" wrote in

When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Where does this quote come from?

Churchill one would assume...

Manitoba? Which one of the bears said that?

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

In message 5DEHb.157132$8y1.465695@attbi_s52, a425couple
writes

"Paul J. Adam" wrote in

When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Where does this quote come from?

His work "The Grand Alliance". Apparently, some felt that the British
declaration of war against Japan on 8 December 1941 was too formal and
insufficiently blood-curdling.

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

"Paul J. Adam" wrote in
a425couple writes
"Paul J. Adam" wrote
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill
Where does this quote come from?

His work "The Grand Alliance". Apparently, some felt that the British
declaration of war against Japan on 8 December 1941 was too formal and
insufficiently blood-curdling.

Thank you for your kind, helpful, and informative response.
Yes, I have found it now on page 514 of my edition.

Steve Hix skrev i meddelelsen ...
In article ,
"Carl Alex Friis Nielsen" wrote:

The entire idea behind assymetric warfare is to refuse to play by the
enemy's rules - so if fighting the US use a doctrine not reqirering an
C3I
infrastructure, which can be attacked - have lots of small dispersed
units capable of
operating on their own initiative.

One problem here; totalitarian regimes tend not to tolerate lots of
initiative in their underlings, which makes preparing for this sort of
fighting somewhat harder.

Why do you assume the US will only fight totalitarian regimes ?

Or that totalitarian regimes can't exist with the suport of the population
- remember that only about 20 % of the worlds population share
our western values.

--------------------------------------
Carl Alex Friis Nielsen

Love Me - take me as I think I am

"Carl Alex Friis Nielsen" wrote:

Why do you assume the US will only fight totalitarian regimes ?

Name a non-totalitarian regime that has a good chance of going up
against the US militarily in the next 20 years.

Or that totalitarian regimes can't exist with the suport of the
population - remember that only about 20 % of the worlds population
share our western values.

Name a true regime of that sort with real popular support. Should be
simple, right?

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

On Thu, 25 Dec 2003 21:28:02 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

"Carl Alex Friis Nielsen" wrote:

Why do you assume the US will only fight totalitarian regimes ?

Name a non-totalitarian regime that has a good chance of going up
against the US militarily in the next 20 years.

Or that totalitarian regimes can't exist with the suport of the
population - remember that only about 20 % of the worlds population
share our western values.

Name a true regime of that sort with real popular support. Should be
simple, right?


Well, a lot of it depends on what you mean by totalitarian. Some
people would call Iran that, but the government enjoys a fair amount
of support, and even many of those who dislike it don't do so enough
to cooperate with a U.S. invasion.
China is another example where many of the citizens support the
government, and while the government is authoritarian, I wouldn't call
it totalitarian in the Hussein mode, but it might be coming into
conflict with the U.S. at some point.

And you migth consider that a democracy has the problem that if
somethign blows up to create great public outcry, the elected leaders
might have to go along with it, even though they wish to avoid the
conflict.
Although not a democracy, China had this problem with the EP3
incident. They called out the demonstraters, but once nationalism got
involved the demonstrations quickly started to escalate beyond what
the leadership wanted. Scared them badly, by some accounts.