Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

The Next Generation of War?

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Ktulu, Sep 28, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ktulu

    Ktulu Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2003
    Messages:
    1,071
    Location:
    Michigan
    Terrorist tactics for war with the West: Al-Qaeda and other jihadist groups have adopted the principles contained in an American military initiative as an attempt to overcome traditional strategic defenses - The nation: war on terror

    Scott L. Wheeler

    Experts and evidence confirm that the al-Qaeda terrorist organization has borrowed both doctrine and strategy from an American military initiative to fight the terror War against the United States. Called the "Fourth Generation Warfare" doctrine, it was laid out and codified in 1989 by a handful of American military officers and a civilian military adviser to a U.S. senator. But while the Department of Defense (DoD) ignored it, al-Qaeda's battle planners claim they have used it so successfully that, "in many instances, nation-states have been defeated by stateless nations."

    The new approach to warfare first was described to the public in a 1989 Marine Corps Gazette article. It was written by William S. Lind, who at the time was military-affairs adviser to Sen. Gary Hart (D-Colo.), and two Army and two Marine Corps officers. They explained what they saw as the next, or fourth generation, of warfare. According to these tacticians, "First-generation warfare reflects tactics of the era of the smoothbore musket--the tactics of line and column." This, the authors explained, was dictated by technology, tradition and the training levels of conscripts.

    The second generation began with grooved barrels on rifle muskets, then moved on to rapid reloaders, the machine gun and indirect fire from artillery. "Massed firepower replaced massed manpower," according to the article.

    The third generation saw the tactics of outmaneuvering, rather than destroying, the opposing force. "The attack relied on infiltration to bypass and collapse the enemy's combat forces," the article states.

    According to these tacticians, the purpose of their analysis was to predict the next generation of combat U.S. forces would encounter--the so-called "fourth generation." As they saw it, this type of warfare has "a goal of collapsing the enemy internally rather than physically destroying him. Targets will include such things as the population's support for the war and the enemy's culture." The authors predicted that armies of the future would "be widely dispersed and largely undefined; the distinction between war and peace will be blurred to the vanishing point. It will be nonlinear, possibly to the point of having no definable battlefields or fronts."

    If this description of fourth-generation warfare seems familiar it is because that is how al-Qaeda and other Islamic terrorist groups conduct business against Israel, the United States and other Western nations.

    But those who developed the concept of fourth-generation warfare warn that the DoD still does not get the picture. In an interview with INSIGHT, Lind says the Pentagon is stuck in linear thinking as it prosecutes the war on terror, without understanding that the United States is up against practitioners of fourth-generation warfare. "It's like it's 1942 and the Pentagon is ignoring carrier aviation," he says.

    Lind, who now is with the Free Congress Foundation, explains that, "We define a bomb as legitimate if it is delivered by an airplane or a cruise missile," but points out that to terrorist armies it can be "a car or a suitcase." As the 1989 article put it, in the mind of the fourth-generation warriors, "the distinction between `civilian' and `military' may disappear."

    The U.S. defense and intelligence community may or may not be in denial over what is happening, but there is no doubt that al-Qaeda and other jihadist groups have embraced the tenets of fourth-generation warfare and see it as their way to victory against the vast military machine of the West in general and the United States in particular. In February, the Middle East Media Research Institute published excerpts from an article it found on a now-defunct al-Qaeda Website, Al-Ansar: For the Struggle Against the Crusader War. The article, "Fourth-Generation Wars" by Abu 'Ubeid al-Qurashi, was pseudonymous, but intelligence sources tell INSIGHT that the writer is a figure of significant stature within al-Qaeda and should be taken seriously. He openly acknowledges the 1989 Marine Corps Gazette article, embraces the principles advanced therein and says, "This new type of war presents significant difficulties for the Western war machine."

    Al-Qurashi's article claims that by using the fourth-generation doctrine al-Qaeda overcame "the elements of America's strategic defense, which the former U.S.S.R. and every other hostile state could not harm. These elements are: early warning, preventive strike and the principle of deterrence." According to al-Qurashi, "With the Sept. 11 attacks, al-Qaeda entered the annals of successful surprise attacks ... because it put every individual in American society on alert for every possibility, whether emotionally or practically. This has an extremely high economic and psychological price."

    With no early, warning of terror attacks, the al-Qaeda strategist says, terror has a force multiplier. With no early warning there can be no preventive strike, al-Qurashi says, because "it is very difficult to launch a successful preventive strike at an organization that maneuvers and moves quickly, and has no permanent bases."

    Al-Qurashi says deterrence has been overcome because, "This principle is based on the assumption that there are two sides that seek to survive and defend their interests--but it is completely eliminated when dealing with people who don't care about living but thirst for martyrdom." He points out that deterrence "works well between countries; it does not work at all for an organization."

    It is these organizations at war that are at the heart of fourth-generation warfare. The authors of that seminal Marine Corps Gazette article say that future war will be based on organizations, tribes and interest groups that bypass a nation-state's military altogether and instead inflict damage to the civilian infrastructure. Lind refers to it as "cause-oriented warfare," saying that future armies will be made up of individuals fighting for a cause without the glue of a nation-state. "The first loyalty will be to their cause, not to their country," says Lind, who thinks that nations in general are "losing their monopoly on loyalty."

    According to military experts familiar with fourth-generation warfare, organizational strategies of this kind pose significant problems for the United States, whose defense doctrine relies mostly on conventional forces. Retired Army Lt. Col. Greg Wilcox tells INSIGHT, "We are not built for fourth-generation warfare in this country. We can't play by the same rules." But Wilcox is convinced the United States now has little choice but to "develop a countermeasure strategy against the terrorist." He says al-Qaeda is bound to strike civilian targets again. "They've got to hit the weak spots," he says.

    Wilcox speculates that the reason the United States has not seen suicide-bomber attacks such as in Israel is that "al-Qaeda may have re-evaluated Sept. 11 and considered that it generated too much sympathy" from the international community. Sympathy for the United States would be inconsistent with the objectives of fourth-generation warfare that involve causing civilian casualties while simultaneously engendering sympathy for the cause of the aggressor organization so as to get the targeted people to blame their own leaders for allowing the continuing attacks.

    Lind says that effectively combating fourth-generation warfare will present conflicts for American culture. The 1989 report states: "If we bomb an enemy city, the pictures of enemy civilian dead brought into every living room in the country on the evening news can easily turn what may have been a military success--assuming we also hit the military target--into a serious defeat." Lind says that as the war continues, and U.S. forces pursue terrorist forces, Americans must get used to casualties among the civilians in whose midst the terrorist jihadists and their supporters will hide. Lind says Muslims who support terrorist attacks know and expect that. "As we weep even over their casualties," he says, "they will be cheering over ours."

    SCOTT L. WHEELER IS A REPORTER FOR Insight.

    http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_1_19/ai_95914216

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It seems to me that one of the defining elements of American culture the individual, personal, ownership of firearms by law abiding civilians would go a long way in preventing and deterring "fourth-generation warfare" attacks on the populace. An age-old solution to a modern problem.

    Of course that's my answer to all of society’s problems.
     
  2. El Tejon

    El Tejon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    18,085
    Location:
    Lafayette, Indiana-the Ned Flanders neighbor to Il
    :rolleyes: More things change, the more they stay the same.

    Seems everyone is copying and repackaging Sun Zi's "Art of War" and calling it a "new doctrine.":scrutiny:

    At least General Giap admitted he based his strategy upon Sun Zi. Of course, Giap, unlike militree officers here, probably was not fighting for a Congressional grant for funding for his project. He just wanted to win a war.

    Ktulu, yes, without any doubt, the soccermommies and their gun control regime caused 9/11. However, the most important thing is the will to resist.

    The Soviets knew this and they were really close to defeating the West with people like Kerry. We shall see if the New Barbary pirates will pull it off or that the West will live.
     
  3. longrifleman

    longrifleman Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    849
    Location:
    western Missouri
    If you are interested in more info on Lind's take on 4th Gen war and it's application to current developments go here:

    William Lind Archives on LewRockwell

    My understandng is that 4th gen is more than guerrilla warfare, although they share a lot of characteristics.
     
  4. boofus

    boofus Guest

    There are some methods of attack that just can not be defended against with conventional means. :barf: pacifism
     
  5. Azrael256

    Azrael256 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,135
    Location:
    Dallas
    Welcome to the market-state. That is one of its hallmarks. Jeez, do people just not read anymore?
     
  6. Waitone

    Waitone Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    5,406
    Location:
    The Land of Broccoli and Fingernails
    Actually the Communist Chinese have a well-developed doctrine of 4th generation warfare. It was the Chinese who put the bee in Al Qaeda's bonnet about airplanes and buildings.

    The biggest single obstacle we face in 4th generation warfare will be our Judeo-Christian ethics. Over the centuries we've developed a code of warfare that comports to our ethics. Islamofascists terrormongers for now and other groups later will not be hindered by that ethic. The west will be challenged to severe the relationship between our ethic and the development of an effective counter measure. A plane into a building is an example of 4th generation warfare; so is a Hellfire missile into a Medrasas. A nuke cooking lower Manhattan is an example; so is an AFE over any one of several holy cities.

    In the final analysis 4 th generation warfare will eventually morph to look alot like low intensity conflicts of the cold war. The ideology is similar except for overlay of god-talk. States are necessary to support terror operations. Financial institutions throughout history have financed war; 4th genration warfare is no different. Wars are fought on the field of battle however you want to define field. Wars are won in back offices of financial institutions. All of which tells me the current WOT will be won and or lost by how well be channel finances.
     
  7. El Tejon

    El Tejon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    18,085
    Location:
    Lafayette, Indiana-the Ned Flanders neighbor to Il
    The Chinese have read the "Art of War"?:what:

    I am shocked, shocked I tell you.:D
     
  8. Atticus

    Atticus Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    2,794
    Location:
    Ohio
    Evidently ...so have the Israeli's.
     
  9. Destructo6

    Destructo6 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,007
    Location:
    Tucson, AZ
    Here's another:
    "The Attitude of the Society toward the People" seems to describe much of the left.

    http://www.spunk.org/library/places/russia/sp000116.txt
     
  10. NMshooter

    NMshooter Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,251
    Thank you for this post Ktulu, it led me to read some most interesting stuff.
     
  11. bountyhunter

    bountyhunter member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Messages:
    3,421
    Location:
    Fascist-Fornia
    For those of us who get information outside of the Rupert Murdoch Propoganda System, this is VERY old news. Osama Bin Laden's Achille's Heel is that he has a big mouth and an ego to match. many years back he made his plans crystal clear.

    1) He declared that any ruling body in an Arab state which was not islam-based was corrupt and would be overthrown. PERIOD.

    2) His first targets would be Iraq (because Hussein is an infidel lackey who beat the hell out of a true Islamic state when he made war on Iran). Bin :aden's second target would be saudi Arabia because they are a US "ally" (although, with allies like them we need no enemies). But SA did allow US troops on their soil.

    3) Bin laden will model his operating plans on the communist plan. Destabilize a wekened country (that would be Iraq). Install an islamic government and use that country as a base to trian and export Islamic fighters. Then take the remaining Arab countries one by one.

    4) Bin laden will attack the oil pipe of saudi Arabia to destroy the US economy. It is a relatively easy target to hit and kills two birds with one stone: hurts SA (who expelled Bin laden and humiliated him) and destroys the US economic "recovery".... if there is any such thing.
     
  12. Destructo6

    Destructo6 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,007
    Location:
    Tucson, AZ
    For a wahhabi, there is no true Islam but wahhabi. Shiites are only next to Druze in their perversion of Islam, at least in the wahhabi view.
     
  13. Ktulu

    Ktulu Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2003
    Messages:
    1,071
    Location:
    Michigan
    NMshooter said:

    My pleasure!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page