The David Kilcullen Collection (merged thread)

[slapout9]

I would like to mention two points that have bearing but are overlooked often.

1-We are "not" a democracy we are a Constitutional Republic. If we were a democracy "Al Gore" would have been president (he had the most votes). Then we go public and invade a country to give them democracy which we don't even have in this country. I went all the way through school and not once did I ever pledge allegiance to the democracy for which it stands! But to the Republic for which it stands! Don't you think the rest of the world sees the hypocrisy of this? We have lost the moral high ground through our own stupidity.

2-The types of enemies we are fighting are very different. Rob Thornton of SWC has talked about Mosul and the fact that generations of children have been raised in war, that is all they know. That is very different than a traditional insurgent or even gang motives. It is closer to tribal conditioned serial murders and that is a poor description. When the FBI originally began to profile what we now call serial killers they wanted to call them "Recreational Killers" they did it because they liked it or had simply grown used to it. The name was changed because it was not PC but it is more descriptive. What does this forecast? You are not going to win the hearts and minds of these groups they will take at a sign of weakness and just become more ruthless and brutal. Your only options are to kill them or imprison them for life.

Fabius may be right when he says we should concentrate on the defense because it is surely lacking in our country.

[Steve Blair]

I would like to mention two points that have bearing but are overlooked often.

[snip]

2-The types of enemies we are fighting are very different. Rob Thornton of SWC has talked about Mosul and the fact that generations of children have been raised in war, that is all they know. That is very different than a traditional insurgent or even gang motives. It is closer to tribal conditioned serial murders and that is a poor description. When the FBI originally began to profile what we now call serial killers they wanted to call them "Recreational Killers" they did it because they liked it or had simply grown used to it. The name was changed because it was not PC but it is more descriptive. What does this forecast? You are not going to win the hearts and minds of these groups they will take at a sign of weakness and just become more ruthless and brutal. Your only options are to kill them or imprison them for life.

Fabius may be right when he says we should concentrate on the defense because it is surely lacking in our country.

What we're seeing is a classic terrorist group generational spiral. I did some research on this kind of stuff in the 1980s, and it was often discussed then. The first generation of a terr group tends to be more idealistic/ideological, and then as each generation is killed off or arrested and replaced with new members, the spiral into killing for the sake of killing becomes more marked. Ideology remained, but with each new "generation" it becomes more and more vague; distinguished by the fact that it is most likely unattainable. It's a justification and no longer a goal.

What is different now is the scale.

[slapout9]

Steve, I would buy that. Especially the scale of it, which is only going to increase if we don't figure out how to stop it. The justification becomes their purpose in life, very deadly. Remember the 120mm post on what color is your AK? I think Jed posted picture of an AK that was highly decorated. When people start doing things like that, violence is becoming part of their very basis for being and they usually don't want to talk about building a great country or how can I be a good citizen.

[SWJED]

From the John Robb - "Global Guerrillas Chimes In" post earlier...

... but not here - so go here - Strategy wars: Lots of discussion of Kilcullen.

Council member ZenPundit also addresses this thread here - Debating Counterinsurgency.

Robb takes more than a few liberties in claiming intellectual property rights on COIN related issues. Looks like a hurt ego is the crux of his post. Kilcullen on the other hand has a genuine interest in our "boots on the ground".

You be the judge on what Robb has to say in his blog entry.

...it's interesting to see how Kilcullen is drawing from the pool of theory very similar to global guerrillas.

<snip>

Anyway, its flattering that this guy is repurposing ideas I've already explored (he is not a plagiarist by any measure!). The only problem is that since he is merely repackaging it, he seems to lack the intuitive grasp necessary to translate it into viable strategy. As a result, his counter-insurgency recommendations are bland gruel of little import.

As an endnote - Robb has this to say about FM's continuing fixation on Dave's works:

Fab, you did a great job kicking the crap out of the 28 articles. Bravo.

Once again our theorists know better than our guys who are living and breathing this stuff. I would not take so much exception to Robb - except - well - he seems to be wrapped up into himself and not a player when push comes to shove.

I am one "knuckle-dragger" that would go to war with Kilcullen.

[slapout9]

Dave,

I don't know why John Robb is talking about plagiarism since most of his whole theory comes "Airpower and Infrastructure: Lord of the Rings" by Lt. Col. Edward J. Felker USAF.

The paper itself is combination of Chaos theory and Warden's 5 Rings, with ring #3 Infrastructure being the most important. The paper is on the INTERNET somewhere if I can still find it I will post it. Point being he does not have any original ideas, dosen't even understand a lot of his own from what I have read. Notice he is following the Mexico situation very closely now. Gee where did that come from?

http://www.au.af.mil/au/aul/aupress/.../Text/mp14.pdf

[jcustis]

As I just finished watching M. Night Shyamalan's Lady in the Water, I am struck by the sentiment from SWJED's statement:

I am one "knuckle-dragger" that would go to war with Kilcullen.

I think many who have lost some of their brethren in this fight would agree with me that we find hope in Kilcullen's works... It is that hope that is important for us, because it is born from deeds of valiant men and women who are the so called two-thirds who either get it or are trying to get it. This is a matter of life and death for us, and them. Sometimes that allows one a peculiar ability to judge character. Kilcullen's character is that he can write (and most likely speak) concisely in an Al Gray or J. M. Mattis sort of way. He was not part of the apparatus that sent us to war, but because he speaks with a voice of positive hope, he seems to be the "king of the hill" that others are trying to tear down.

If there was an easy button for this long war, we would have hit it long ago.
------
P.S. At the end of the day, I suppose none of this will matter, because the course of this fight will be charted by so many others who have never had to walk outside the wire.

[marct]

Hi JC,

I think many who have lost some of their brethren in this fight would agree with me that we find hope in Kilcullen's works... It is that hope that is important for us, because it is born from deeds of valiant men and women who are the so called two-thirds who either get it or are trying to get it. This is a matter of life and death for us, and them. Sometimes that allows one a peculiar ability to judge character. Kilcullen's character is that he can write (and most likely speak) concisely in an Al Gray or J. M. Mattis sort of way. He was not part of the apparatus that sent us to war, but because he speaks with a voice of positive hope, he seems to be the "king of the hill" that others are trying to tear down.

I think that this observation is actually crucial. I've been arguing on a number of threads that this is a symbolic war and, if we strip away all the verbiage, what that comes down to is "this is what we believe, this is what we have to offer, and this is why it is better than what the insurgents offer." I haven't seen that coming from many of the political leaders, but I have seen it coming from the people on he ground.

P.S. At the end of the day, I suppose none of this will matter, because the course of this fight will be charted by so many others who have never had to walk outside the wire.

Quite true about who will end up charting the course, but why say that it doesn't matter? JC, as a suggestion, if you read through Kilcullen's Countering Global Insurgency, esp. sections 3 and 4, but change the focus from the Islamists to the West, what do you find? His suggested strategy of disaggregation is already being used against us by the Islamists. One of the reasons why I really like the SWC is that it is, whether it was intended or not, using a strategy of re-aggregation.

On the pragmatics of some of this, however, I'm moving over to the cell phone thread.

Marc

[Fabius Maximus]

What we're seeing is a classic terrorist group generational spiral. ... The first generation of a terr group tends to be more idealistic/ideological, and then as each generation is killed off or arrested and replaced with new members, the spiral into killing for the sake of killing becomes more marked. Ideology remained, but with each new "generation" it becomes more and more vague; distinguished by the fact that it is most likely unattainable. It's a justification and no longer a goal. What is different now is the scale.

That's a powerful observation, an application of the general effect where a war's increasing death toll requires escalation of the goals -- to justify cost in blood beyond what we originally expected. WWI starts as a battle in some rim states, escalates to a war "to end wars."

On this level it applies to us as well. We go into Iraq to find WMD's, and eventually our goals morph to bringing democracy to the Middle East.

Even more relevant, we're seeing what I call a Darwinian “ratchet”:

... in which the security forces (in effect) power the insurgency. The security services cull the pack of insurgents. They eliminate the slow and stupid, clearing space for the “best” to rise in authority. That is, those most able to survive, recruit, and train new ranks of more effective insurgents. The more severe our efforts at exterminating the insurrection, the more ruthless the survivors.

Hence the familiar activity pattern of a rising sine wave, seen in Palestine, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Iraq, and a dozen other places: successes by the security forces, a pause in activity, followed by another wave of activity – but bigger and more effective.

From: http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/fabius_forecast_7-2006_part1.htm

Both of these dynamics tend to make insurgencies difficult to defeat.