Asymmetric.

This is coolbert:

“Kill them all - - let GOD sort them out!!”

“The purpose of terror is to terrorize!!” - - V.I. Lenin.

From the wiki entry on Fourth Generational Warfare [4GW]:

"Ways for a state military to cope with fourth generation warfare"

It has been noted by many observers [Roger Trinquier the foremost?] that conventional military units, using conventional military tactics, have historically been generally unable to successfully combat an opponent who employs partisan/irregular/insurgent/guerrilla warfare as THEIR [the opponent] preferred means of combat.

Exceptional means can be used to combat the partisan/irregular/insurgent/guerrilla. Tactics and methods requiring massive violence quite often directed against UNARMED persons!

"There are few examples of the state being effective in a 4GW conflict . . . the state is to use overwhelming force to generate large amounts of casualties and do so fast enough that the objectives are achieved"

Tactics and methods [exceptional means] that most conquerors/occupiers are loathe to implement. Requires a level of destruction and killing on such a massive scale that, as a rule, normally even the WORST rulers/”military men” are hesitant to proceed.

Historically, there are of course exceptions. Some “military men”/rulers/conquerors/occupiers ARE WILLING to apply scorched earth measures on a massive scale. Murder, rape, pillage, arson. What is left of the victimized population is too terrified, dispirited, and cowed to respond. The will to resist no longer exists.

THE PURPOSE OF TERROR IS TO TERRORIZE!!

[we must be clear here. We are not talking about "things got carried away" or "things got out of control". We are talking about merciless slaughter for the most part done with pre-meditation and cold-bloodedness. Utter ruthlessness, normal restraints not applying!!!]

Within the historical record we find such as exceptions as:

* The chevauchee of the Black Prince.

* Destruction of Hama by Assad of Syria. [the Hama model is derived from this “incident”.]

"It is called the Hama (named after the Syrian city of the same name that was eradicated by the Syrian army under the leadership of Hafez el Assad) model"

* Liquidation of the Polish Home Army, Battle of Warsaw [1944].

[Greatly facilitated by the atrocious behavior of the Derliwanger.]

* Dispersals of conquered peoples by Tiglath-Pilesar. [Assyrian Empire, 700 B.C.]

With regard to the latter:

Entire populations of peoples, such as the Hebrews of ancient Judea, would be taken from their homeland and dispersed into small groups. Political and cultural continuity would be destroyed and with it, the will to resist the conqueror/occupier.

"The mighty Assyrian monarch Tiglath Pilesar III [r. 745-727 B.C. was the inventor of a new method of breaking the will of conquered populations . . Tiglath Pilesar's genial idea, therefore, was to sever the primary lifelines of attachment to the soil by transferring conquered populations to lands distant from their own . . . until not a vestige of the earlier, ground-rooted sense of a national continuity remained."

Tiglath was one hard and cold ruler who exercised POWER!!

coolbert.

Asymmetric Warfare.

This is coolbert:

To be able to talk about asymmetric warfare with a certain degree of knowledge is essential for "experts" in the military realm.

"Experts" who do not always seem to be as knowledgeable as they like to think they are. Or so it seems to me.

Asymmetric warfare is:

"a term that describes a military situation in which two belligerents of unequal power or capacity of action, interact and take advantage of the strengths and weaknesses of themselves and their enemies."

* Unequal power or capacity of action.

* Interact.

* Take advantage - - strengths and weaknesses.

"Typically at least one of the parties involved may be referred to as partisans. Partisan comes from the Tuscan word, "partigiano", meaning a member of a party of light or irregular troops engaged in harassing an enemy, esp. a member of a guerrilla band engaged in fighting or sabotage against an occupying army."

Such as is occurring in the current jihadi war in Iraq or as is fought by Al Qaeda world-wide. Small insurgents/guerillas/partisans/terrorists fighting against a conventional military force [U.S.].

Typically, but not always so. Conventional forces too can use asymmetry.

[my perception is that the modern-day pundits and "experts" see asymmetry as being solely within the realm of unconventional warfare practitioners such as Al Qaeda. This is not so!]

Such was the case with the Long Lance torpedo. A force somewhat weaker in number and kind [Japanese Navy] saw the Long Lance as a potential war winner. As I have said. The Long Lance, combined with other slight advantages, added up to a big plus for the Japanese in surface warfare. A Japanese destroyer force of eight ships could take on and BEAT DECISIVELY a U.S. Navy task force of four cruisers.

The tactical success of the Japanese at Tassafaronga using asymmetric warfare was based upon:

* "One side can have a technological advantage which outweighs the numerical advantage of the enemy."

The superiority of the Long Lance in range and explosive force gave a decisive edge to the inferior [inferior naval gunfire capability] Japanese destroyer force.

* "Training and tactics as well as technology can prove decisive and allow a smaller force to overcome forces much larger than they are."

Superior night fighting tactics, rehearsed, and the use of spotters with superior vision and equipped with superior optics gave an advantage over EVEN RADAR!!

Asymmetric warfare is not limited to the fourth generation warfare practitioner or Al Qaeda. Is also practiced by conventional forces too.

See an interesting article that deals with the Long Lance and it's appreciation as a weapon of asymmetric warfare.

"The Japanese Navy developed the Type 93 Long Lance torpedo that carried a large warhead and could travel 20,000 yards or more at speeds of up to 45 knots . . ."

"In consequence, the Japanese trained to fight at night, with radically maneuvering destroy-ers and cruisers that fired torpedoes. For more than 2 years after the U.S. Navy en-countered the Long Lance in early 1942, it did not appreciate the weapon’s capabilities. The two navies had proceeded down different asymmetric paths
. . ."

"Eventually, U.S. air power, radar-directed gunfire, and other tactical adaptations restored some balance, but throughout the war, the Japanese tor-pedo baffled Navy planners. The U.S. Navy suf-fered an asymmetric technological and tactical surprise . . we had no easy answers."

NO EASY ANSWERS. NO!

coolbert.

Cyber-attack.

This is coolbert:

Here is an article from "Wired" magazine on line that describes how effective a cyber-attack by terrorists could potentially be.

"I participated in a cyberterrorism exercise held at a homeland security convention this spring in Washington, DC. Set up by the Dartmouth Institute for Security Technology Studies, the simulation was a relatively low tech affair in which hackers and other evildoers attempted to do their worst to a hypothetical New England city called Harbortown."

["I" of course is the writer of the article.]

"Annoying, but not worth creating a new military-industrial complex over."

[this is a description of what is called "round one" of the exercise. The cyber-attack is merely ANNOYING!!]

Round two, however, resulted in different results. NOT just a cyber-attack alone. A cyber-attack done in the aftermath of a crisis of some sort.

"The game couldn't end soon enough. I don't think we won . . . During the debriefing, the sim's devious creators filled us in on what we'd been up against . . . Computers don't kill people; people with computers kill people."

Cyber-attack must be considered a COMBAT MULTIPLIER for the terrorists. NOT effective as a means of attack by ITSELF. As an ADJUNCT to a conventional attack, adds to the overall effect and IS effective. Creates confusion, either by "taking down" means of communication OR BY INSERTING DECEIVING MESSAGES TO CREATE FURTHER TURMOIL AND CHAOS.

This is the sort of thing employed by both conventional soldiers on the modern battlefield, as well as fourth generational warfare [4GW] practitioners. The latter in particular, on the cheap, using laptop computer, internet connections, and various softwares, wielded by skilled computer hackers, are able to wreak havoc WHEN DONE IN CONJUNCTION WITH CONVENTIONAL TERRORIST ATTACKS. This the simulation seems to indicate.

coolbert.