[FoRK] Reducing defense spending
jbone at place.org
Fri Jun 25 07:40:17 PDT 2010
On Jun 25, 2010, at 9:09, mdw at martinwills.com wrote:
> You obviously have never had any military training. Aircraft can not
> hold territory, bodies in the wadies do. Tanks do not hold territory.
> Bodies do. Artillery does not hold territory. Bodies do. Until there
> is a body holding onto a piece of ground, it isn't worth having or
> fighting over.
Obviously you are too mired in the Napoleonic mindset to think outside
that box. Few wars in the last several decades have had as their
ostensible goal "holding ground.". Fewer still are likely to be about
that in the future. In fact, it is falling into that cognitive trap
that gets us into endless no-exit scenarios that cost terabucks.
More surgical disruption of social / political / ideological networks,
less occupation. Coupled with real strategic use of weapons and
incentives-setting, and you need far fewer bodies in the wadies.
Too, most but not all local kill is increasingly automatable --- and,
at the end of the day, that's the kind of weapon a soldier is. You
need boots in the theater for human interaction, but grunts generally
make poor diplomats and spies.
Indispensable yes. Way overused to little effect, yes. As long as we
engage enemies on their terms in these ways, we choose to discard most
of our advantage.
More information about the FoRK