
![]() | |
October 2011
September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003
|
Greetings! You are reading an article from The Mudville Gazette. To reach the front page, with all the latest news and views, click the logo above or "main" below. Thanks for stopping by! January 14, 2009 Strategy and GadgetryBy GreyhawkH.R. McMaster in World Affairs: The Human Element: When Gadgetry Becomes Strategy. Not disagreeing with him here, but in reading any analysis of any sort of strategic shortfall in 2003-2004 Iraq planning and execution, I remind myself that all such shortfalls are defined by enemy responses to our actions. As the enemy would have responded differently to different actions, those could now be identified as failures too had we executed them with something less than perfect results. (A likely outcome regardless of our actions.) As specific example, it's easy to claim that many of the problems we faced in Iraq (and those that linger) could have been prevented by sending more troops initially - easy because it's true (or at least as true as speculation can be). But to claim we wouldn't be confronted with a different set of problems altogether (along with many of the same) is much more an exercise in wishful thinking. Many of those hypothetical problems would - like our current reality and that of the past six years - have been predicted by someone. And many of those someones would now be participating in some degree of righteous chest-thumping. To break it down to a simple model: If we follow option z, we may be confronted by a, b, and c. But if we choose y, then c, d, and f may follow. Along with that are various "x" factors within the spectrum of results. But ultimately, one weighs the risks and makes decisions in full knowledge of the consequences. As I said, that's a simple model. Reality is that simple model compounded with infinite options, permutations, possible outcomes and unknowns. That applies to much more than combat - it's every aspect of life in a nutshell. No doubt you've encountered experts (sought or unsought) at various way points in yours who've been willing and eager to point out what you could have done better. That said, some such expert advice or opinion is authentic, informed, useful, and welcome to the wise. McMaster's falls into that category. The lingering question is who are the wise. Posted by Greyhawk / January 14, 2009 3:26 AM | Permalink 3 Comments |
November 26, 2010America@war [Greyhawk]
I think anyone who's ever pondered the "comment" option - once only available on blogs and bulletin boards, now ubiquitous on almost any web site - will appreciate this:
The so-called faculty of writing is not so much a faculty of writing as it is a faculty of thinking. When a man says, "I have an idea but I can't express it"; that man hasn't an idea but merely a vague feeling. If a man has a feeling of that kind, and will sit down for a half an hour and persistently try to put into writing what he feels, the probabilities are at least 90 percent that he will either be able to record it, or else realize that he has no idea at all. In either case, he will do himself a benefit. That's wisdom from the past, captured for posterity at the US Naval Institute, shared via the web on the institute's 137th anniversary. From their about page:
"The Naval Institute has three core activities," among them, History and Preservation: The Naval Institute also has recently introduced Americans at War, a living history of Americans at war in their own words and from their own experiences. These 90-second vignettes convey powerful stories of inspiration, pride, and patriotism. Take a look at the collection, and you'll see it's not limited to accounts from those who served on ships at sea, members of the other branches are well-represented. I'm fortunate to have met USNI's Mary Ripley, she's responsible for the institute's oral history program (and she's the daughter of the late John Ripley, whose story is told here). She also deserves much credit for their blog. ("We're not the Navy nor any government agency. Blog and comment freely.") We met at a milblog conference - Mary knew (and I would come to realize) that milbloggers are the 21st-century version of exactly what the US Naval Institute is all about. Once that light bulb came on in my head, I mentioned a vague idea for a project to her - milblogs as the 21st century oral history that they are. "Put that in writing," she said (of course - see first paragraph above!) - and here's part of the result. Shortly after the first tent was pitched by the American military in Iraq a wire was connected to a computer therein, and the internet was available to a generation of Americans at war - many of whom had grown up online. From that point on, at any given moment, somewhere in Iraq a Soldier, Sailor, Airman or Marine was at a keyboard sharing the events of his or her day with the folks back home. While most would simply fire off an email, others took advantage of the (then) relatively new online blogging platforms to post their thoughts and experiences for the entire world to see. The milblog was born - and from that moment to this stories detailing everything from the most mundane aspects of camp life to intense combat action (often described within hours of the event) have been available on the web... And et cetera - but since you're reading this on a milblog, you probably knew that. And you know that milblogs aren't just blogs written by troops at war, that many friends, family members, and supporters likewise documented their story of America at war online in near-real time, as those stories developed. The diversity in membership of that group is broad, the one thing we all have in common is the impulse to make sense of the seemingly senseless, and communicate the tale - for each of us that impulse was strong enough to overcome whatever barriers prevent the vast majority of people from doing the same. Everyone at some point has some vague idea they believe should be shared - we were the people who, from some combination of internal and external urging, found and spent those many half hours persistently trying to write it down. But where will all that be in another 137 years? Or five or ten, for that matter. That's something I've asked myself since at least 2004 - when I wrote this:
Membership in the ghost battalion has grown in the years since, and an ever growing majority of those abandoned-but-still-standing sites are vanishing. Have you checked out Lt Smash's site lately? How about Sgt Hook's? If you're a long-time milblog reader you know the first widely-read milblog from Operation Iraq Freedom and the first widely-read milblog from Afghanistan are both gone from the web. If you're a relative newcomer to this world you may never even have heard of them - or the dozens upon dozens of others who carried forth the standard they set down. If you have a vague notion that something should be done about that, (a notion I've heard expressed more than once...) then you and I and the good folks at the US Naval Institute are in agreement. Preserving the history documented by the milbloggers is just one of the goals of the milblog project, the once-vague idea that we're now making real. And it's a big idea, if I say so myself - too big to explain in one simple blog post, so stand by for more. Likewise, it's too big a task to be accomplished by just one person. So if you're a milblogger (and exactly what is a milblogger? is a topic for much further discussion on its own) I'm asking for your help. All I'll really need is just a little bit (maybe just one or two of those half hours...) of your time, and your willingness to tell the tale. We've already made history, it's time to save it. (More to follow...) Posted 4:02 PM | Permalink |
Comments (0) |
|
The Mudville Gazette is the on-line voice of an American warrior and his wife who stands by him. They prefer to see peaceful change render force of arms unnecessary. Until that day they stand fast with those who struggle for freedom, strike for reason, and pray for a better tomorrow.
![]() Furthermore, I will occasionally use satire or parody herein. The bottom line: it's my house. I like having visitors to my house. I hope you are entertained. I fight for your right to free speech, and am thrilled when you exercise said rights here. Comments and e-mails are welcome, but all such communication is to be assumed to be 1)the original work of any who initiate said communication and 2)the property of the Mudville Gazette, with free use granted thereto for publication in electronic or written form. If you do NOT wish to have your message posted, write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the subject line of your email. Original content copyright © 2003 - 2011 by Greyhawk. Fair, not-for-profit use of said material by others is encouraged, as long as acknowledgement and credit is given, to include the url of the original source post. Other arrangements can be made as needed. Contact: greyhawk at mudvillegazette dot com ![]() Tending Distant Far from hearth and home, watching What tales we'll tell When things grim Some distant sunset, vision fading Saluting fallen friends whose names - Greyhawk, Baghdad, December 2004 |
Most people can not name the General who followed Westmoreland even though the current main battle tank is named after him. The thing I remember about Gen. Abrams, unlike Westmoreland, you hardly ever saw him on TV. He implemented what was called "clear and hold" - I think as I'm not military or a historian. So even in Vietnam there was a similar transition. I haven't read McMaster's book but I would be interested in his, and others, comments about the approach exercised by Gen. Abrams.
Bad intelligence no doubt played a major role in the original plan of a "small footprint" while the Iraqi's instituted their own form of democracy. This seems a reasonable response if there where a significant number of Iraqi's prepared to implement a new form of government - obviously there were far too few if any.
What good came out of Vietnam? "Jointness". I would also include support of the troops. There are a lot of grandparents alive today that know of family or friends, if not themselves, who served in Vietnam and were vilified for actions of commanders and politicians.
Technology: Engineers need to speak with "boots on the ground" and DoD needs a way to fund small companies. Too often the needs of the combatants get transformed into a large program because the defense contractors are not interested in "small" programs. Recently, DoD has taken steps to encourage small company innovations. The DoD procurement cycle is just too cumbersome for rapid development because of past graft by contractors. DARPA is somewhat better.
Jointness needs to be expanded to State and other departments like USAID. They should hire retiring Special Ops types to provide advice and links to the military.
It seems the military is the only branch of government who exercises "lessons learned". The middle managers of Vietnam who stayed in the military, created the greatest fighting force the world has ever known. And this has been achieved without losing their humanity. Members of the US Military have every right to be proud of their service.
(Someday there may well be a McMaster tank based on the battle of 73 Eastling...)
You make good point, young Trung Ta, enemy reaction does not prove a plan was good or bad. If we had done smarter things, they may have countered with more devestating bad things. Newly minted BG McMasters is a stud and his previous criticism of the pentagon flags prostituting themselves to the "Best/Brightest" of the Vietnam Era era it appears has taken root with your generation. Per the comment above, I once briefed Gen Abrams and staff as a SOG/SF project CO, and in the middle of the 5th SFGA/Col Reault debacle, and he treated me with a commanders respect for his troops. I would submit that his view of what happened to Gen Westmoreland is why he refused to give interviews, and also because it would have been hard for him to give honest opinions without saying some of McMaster's later criticism points.
We can not know what the outcome in Vietnam would have been if the battlefield decisions had taken into account the political unsustainability of a large scale draft.
History is clear, in a democracy, conscription to support a conflict which is not viewed by the people as a 'clear and present danger' has a very short clock.