Definition of a raid

[Bob's World]

I support Ken's frequent assertion that "strategic raids" are a valuable tool. This is also a tool that we neglect in our planning, preparation and implementation. In many ways, the USMC is the ultimate strategic raiding force, but we don't really highlight that fact.

Armies are great for fighting wars, but not so much for conducting strategic raids. Various SOF forces are good for small raids designed for strategic effect, but for the larger ones the USMC is a force without peer. (Yes, air delivered munitions have their place, but to become over reliant on such impersonal devices is a bad business. Sometimes you have to look a guy in the eye to deliver the appropriate message)

One can deter a lot of silliness and avoid a lot of long, drawn out frustrating "intervention" through the possession of the ability to employ a powerful, effective strategic raid when necessary.

[Fuchs]

This begs the question (and is related to the thread about avoiding stupidities) when is a country taking enough damage from another country to justify a violation of the latter's sovereignty but the damages stop accumulating after just a raid???

I don't think such a case exists.
A strategic raid in what's otherwise peacetime amounts to a backlash-prone aggression and can easily provoke a cascade of uncontrollable and possibly very undesirable effects.

[Ken White]

The trick is to differentiate between those two potentialities. We, the world, need to work on that...

This begs the question (and is related to the thread about avoiding stupidities) when is a country taking enough damage from another country to justify a violation of the latter's sovereignty but the damages stop accumulating after just a raid???

That's like pornography. I can't describe it but I know it when I see it...

The serious answers, plural, are that's in the eyes of the offended nation and can vary due to many things; what precisely was or will be raided and for what effect; is / was the raid designed to 'stop' damages or to destroy ability for more or other damages; is / was it designed for another purpose entirely?

I don't think such a case exists.

Perhaps not, I'm too lazy to search my memory banks just now -- may do so later. Now, simply recall the same thing could be said of Pakistan in 1945, the Internet in 1950, Al Qaeda in 1980,the G-20 in 1995 or South Sudan in 2005...

Things change. One adapts or one stays mired in the past.

A strategic raid in what's otherwise peacetime amounts to a backlash-prone aggression and can easily provoke a cascade of uncontrollable and possibly very undesirable effects.

Any type of war, warfare or warlike action does all that. That applies equally to the potential provocation(s) and / or provacateurs that might spur such a Raid in the first place.

Consider also that some such Raids might actually be Demonstrations or Feints and be aimed at an indirectly related target, result in no casualties to anyone and serve merely as a demonstration of capability -- or resolve.

The 'rules' are changing. Have in fact changed. They are not going back to those of the turn of the 20th Century -- or even the 21st. To paraphrase both the SAS and SBS mottoes; Who adapts wins -- by strength and guile...

[Fuchs]

Wikipedia definition of a raid:

Raid, also known as depredation, is a military tactic or operational warfare mission which has a specific purpose and is not normally intended to capture and hold terrain, but instead finish with the raiding force quickly retreating to a previous defended position prior to the enemy forces being able to respond in a co-ordinated manner or formulate a counter-attack. Within the tactical mission, a raiding group may consist of personnel specially trained in this tactic (such as commandos or guerrilla fighters), regular soldiers, or any organized group of combatants.

The purposes of a raid may include:

to demoralize, confuse, or exhaust an enemy
to ransack or pillage a location
to obtain property or capture people
to destroy goods or other things with an economic value
to free POWs
to kill or capture specific people
to gather intelligence.

with references to historical raids (Vikings, Native Americans, Mongols - that stuff).

[Bob's World]

The Commanche were the masters of the raid, covering vast distances at night (thus the American saying "Commanche Moon", for some 50 years settlers feared the full moon with good reason), to strike ruthlessly, round up vast herds of horses, and be back home hundreds of miles away before any pursuit could be organized.

Thank god AQ is nowhere near as capable or dangerous as these warriors were. Of note, we never said we were a "nation at war" in those days, and most of the fighting was done by civilians and para-military Ranger units. The military had the wrong gear, the wrong doctrine and never understood what they were dealing with. Ultimately the military applied an indirect approach with minor success, but it was the buffalo hunters who forced the Commanche onto the reservation.

Just a hat tip to some master raiders.

[Steve Blair]

The Commanche were the masters of the raid, covering vast distances at night (thus the American saying "Commanche Moon", for some 50 years settlers feared the full moon with good reason), to strike ruthlessly, round up vast herds of horses, and be back home hundreds of miles away before any pursuit could be organized.

Thank god AQ is nowhere near as capable or dangerous as these warriors were. Of note, we never said we were a "nation at war" in those days, and most of the fighting was done by civilians and para-military Ranger units. The military had the wrong gear, the wrong doctrine and never understood what they were dealing with. Ultimately the military applied an indirect approach with minor success, but it was the buffalo hunters who forced the Commanche onto the reservation.

Just a hat tip to some master raiders.

So were the Piegan/Blackfeet peoples, who raided all the way down to lower Wyoming...often for the sheer excitement of it. The Apache were also very good at that sort of warfare, as were the Navajo before 1864 or so.

And you're mistaken to some degree about just who fought the Indian Wars, Bob. I won't bore folks with the details, though, but just point out that there were some commanders and units who understood that sort of warfare. Often the irregulars caused more problems than they solved.

[ganulv]

And you're mistaken to some degree about just who fought the Indian Wars, Bob. I won't bore folks with the details, though, but just point out that there were some commanders and units who understood that sort of warfare. Often the irregulars caused more problems than they solved.

I do think Bob’s characterization works for the Anglophone colonies in the 17th century and the early 18th century, though I would hasten to add that native allies should be summed to the parties involved. I won’t bore folks with details, either, but I think there might be an interesting separate thread about the particulars at some point.

[Ken White]

of today has yet to be written...

The purposes of a raid may include:

to demoralize, confuse, or exhaust an enemy
to ransack or pillage a location
to obtain property or capture people
to destroy goods or other things with an economic value
to free POWs
to kill or capture specific people
to gather intelligence.

Many of those purposes are still quite valid, others not so much...

[Fuchs]

"to obtain property or capture people"

Why not?
Remember the manhunt in Somalia a while ago.

A classic example for a raid to obtain property was the British raid in WW2 that was aimed at capturing a Würzburg radar set. Nowadays one might think of securing some nukes or chemicals that cannot just be demolished on the spot (for safety reasons).