more on High-tech army defeats insurgency; May I citesome examples?

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Munro, Neil" <NMunro () nationaljournal com>
Date: October 4, 2005 4:04:53 PM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re. High-tech army defeats insurgency; May I citesome examples?



Armies routinely defeat insurgencies. You just don't hear about those
that don't exist any more. The media tends to forget what isn't news,
avoid losers and wallow in Vietnam.

The Brits defeated the Malayan communists, and the US & Philippines
defeated the Huks, in the 1960s. The Brits defeated the IRA this month
after 25 years and roughly 4,000 deaths. The Red Army Faction,
Baader-Meinhof and the Red Brigades are gone. The US killed Che in
Bolivia, then helped defeat the communists in El Salvador. The US helped
destroy the insurgent Viet Cong in South Vietnam, but then cut off
ammunition to the South Vietnamese Army when it was being attacked by
the North Vietnamese Army's tank divisions in 1975. The US defeated the
Philippines rebels in the early 1900s, and sundry Indian tribes in the
1800s.

In bloodier wars, the Chinese army defeated the large Tibetan insurgency
in the 1960s, after which the Tibetans emphasized the role of
non-violence. The Germans defeated the Namibians, the Brits defeated
insurgencies many times around the empire including several in Ireland -
and the Russians subjugated numerous groups in their vast empire.

For useful - albeit limited - updates on the military situation in the
Iraq campaign, visit billroggio.com and
http://fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com/

Neil

PS Pentagon types have long sought ways to measure progress in an
Iraq-type campaign. There are many ways to do it, including opinion
polls, the volume of tips, the number of enemy deserters, the going-rate
for contract-attacks, even the cost of renting a taxi from Baghdad
airport to town. Soldiers know that war is chiefly a matter of the
heart, and that efforts to identify markers are easily jeered at by
people who prefer to count material-factors, such as corpses.










-----Original Message-----
From: David Farber [mailto:dave () farber net]
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 3:04 PM
To: Ip Ip
Subject: [IP] USG RFI for "metrics" on the 'terror war'



Begin forwarded message:

From: Richard Forno <rforno () infowarrior org>
Date: October 4, 2005 2:45:23 PM EDT
To: Infowarrior List <infowarrior () g2-forward org>
Cc: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
Subject: USG RFI for "metrics" on the 'terror war'



While I'm all for knowing how to measure one's effectiveness, I fear
that
such "metrics" will be nothing more than a rehash of Vietnam-era body
count
tallies as the "measure of success" in the 'war' to make juicy and
positive-sounding quotes for the current iteration of the Five O'Clock
Follies.

This, coupled with the continuing belief that a conventional high-
tech army
can defeat a low-tech insurgency (something that has not happened in
Western
history to my knowledge) only reinforces my sense that the USG is not
learning from history but rather repeating it.

The fact that a contractor is being asked to develop these "metrics"
speaks
volumes, IMHO.  You'd think this would be something they'd have come
up with
BEFORE launching into the 'war' on terror, right?

-rick

<snip>



> The Contractor shall develop, in conjunction with the Joint Staff,
> OSD,
> Combatant and Unified Commands, Services and designated Agencies
> (stakeholders) a system of metrics to accurately assess US progress
> in the War
> on Terrorism, identify critical issues hindering progress and
> develop and
> track action plans to resolve the issues identified. In this
> effort, the
> contractor shall work as an independent contractor not subject to the
> supervision and control of the Government. All deliverables become the
> property of the US Government.


Source document:
http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/files/
WarOnTerrorismMetrics.doc





-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as nmunro () nationaljournal com
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/