Taiko
Good post. For me, 90% of you are saying reflects my often repeated opinions here. Particularly
- From a Clausewitzian perspective war is war. Its very essence is a violent clash of two opposing wills. For Clausewitz, why we fight is more important than how we fight.
- One of the roles of theory is to provide a common language that policy-makers, military professionals, and civilian academics can use in order to better communicate their understanding of the phenomena they are dealing with.
- At no stage in developing this understanding of the nature of the conflict in Afghanistan did I need to specifically refer to a specific style of warfare. To be quite honest, I believe that the phrase 'military operations' does not need an adjective to describe how we should conduct the war in Afghanistan at the general level.
On the last point, describing the nature of the conflict, is only necessary for purposes of how modern militaries understand war, and not how war actually is. People get upset when you say "War is War."
Again that is useful.
Have you read
this
Bookmarks