GEN Petraeus vs. Ralph Peters on Graduate Education for Officers

Quote:

---

I see an important ethical distinction between advocating aggressive illegal violence (the Interhamwe) and advocating forceful methods against enemies. To the best of my knowledge (and someone correct me if I'm wrong), Ralph's argument has been that we are in a state of war but have imposed restraints on ourselves that states do not normally impose when in a state of war. Now, I personally disagree with that. In the monograph I'm working on now, I argue that "war" is not the appropriate response to the threat we face. But IF one buys the notion that we are at war, I think Ralph's position is at least reasonable.

---

Steve

I would say that is a question of how you define the enemy and how you see the conflict. I see it as a conflict that requires much less force and a broader spectrum of tools. I also see the enemy as a smaller and inherently dangerous foe not given to negotiation. A mailed fist is the wrong tool, one likely to spread the conflict.

Tom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom Odom

Steve

I would say that is a question of how you define the enemy and how you see the conflict. I see it as a conflict that requires much less force and a broader spectrum of tools. I also see the enemy as a smaller and inherently dangerous foe not given to negotiation. A mailed fist is the wrong tool, one likely to spread the conflict.

Tom

---

I agree with you. The point I was trying to make is that I think it's valid to critique Ralph's position on the basis of effectiveness or on the basis of incongruence with the American national culture (which was my line of attack against Luttwak), but I don't think you can say, ipso facto, that it's immoral IF one assumes we are at war. I buy Ralph's point that IF we are at war, we should behave as if we are at war. I do not buy the point that we are at war (or, more accurately, that war is the appropriate and effective response to the threat we face).

Steve--

I would contend that the "mailed fist" in Guatemala largely prolonged the war. Granted, military operations specifically targeted on insurgents were effective but those targeted on civilian, Indian communities were counterproductive. What worked for the Guatemalans was their Civil Affairs program called "Polos de Desarrollo" that created armed villages - Mayan language speaking - with significant economic, political, and social rewards. Indeed, it never was the scorched earth campaign initiated or expanded by Rios Montt that brought an end to the war but rather the return of democracy and a population centric strategy coupled with intelligence driven operations against the insurgents that won the fight.

I would also take issue with you regarding the notion that the insurgency in Iraq (and by extension other insurgencies) is not war. Indeed, isurgency is probably the most total war around requiring a real mobilization of the societies under attack or by the attackers if they would achieve success over thelong term. That does not mean repression as the strategy. Sure, absolute repression does work for a while. But to use the Guatemalan case again, the most recent insurgency was the third generation - the first two were wiped out - repressed absolutely - but insurgency was resurgent.:)

Cheers

JohnT

I think an argument can be made that it was pretty effective for Saddam for several years. However, it was at the cost of several mass graves. That is a cost we are not willing to accept. I think the approach that is being suggested by Peters could work without the mass graves, but it would require more troops than we would ever be willing to commit to Iraq. I think the current surge suggest there is a more effective approach using more economy for force.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John T. Fishel

Steve--

I would contend that the "mailed fist" in Guatemala largely prolonged the war. Granted, military operations specifically targeted on insurgents were effective but those targeted on civilian, Indian communities were counterproductive. What worked for the Guatemalans was their Civil Affairs program called "Polos de Desarrollo" that created armed villages - Mayan language speaking - with significant economic, political, and social rewards. Indeed, it never was the scorched earth campaign initiated or expanded by Rios Montt that brought an end to the war but rather the return of democracy and a population centric strategy coupled with intelligence driven operations against the insurgents that won the fight.

I would also take issue with you regarding the notion that the insurgency in Iraq (and by extension other insurgencies) is not war. Indeed, isurgency is probably the most total war around requiring a real mobilization of the societies under attack or by the attackers if they would achieve success over thelong term. That does not mean repression as the strategy. Sure, absolute repression does work for a while. But to use the Guatemalan case again, the most recent insurgency was the third generation - the first two were wiped out - repressed absolutely - but insurgency was resurgent.:)

Cheers

JohnT

---

I spent quite a bit of time working on a reply to your thoughtful post. Here's what I came up with: "Sez YOU!!!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SteveMetz

I spent quite a bit of time working on a reply to your thoughtful post. Here's what I came up with: "Sez YOU!!!"

---

Oh man I am laughing so hard my gut hurts :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom Odom

Oh man I am laughing so hard my gut hurts :D

---

Different issue. Category: Army Africanists. Do you know Mike Smith? I'd lost touch with him over the past few years, but spent an hour in his office in State PolMil today. He's doing great work.

Steve,

The name rings a bell but I cannot place him.

Best

Tom

Mike is a really great guy.

Hi,

I am a civilian that just joined a while ago, but I enjoy reading the Small Wars Forums, because there are many things I can learn and apply to my life. While a librarian isn't a "warrior" per say, I learned many important things like motivation and why knowledge is important in my own professional/educational career.

Sincerely,
Naomi Chiba