Bill Moore:
I read that article and was quite impressed. Something jumped out at me though as I read it. The word 'strategy' is so imprecise that its use just muddies the waters. I know it confuses the hell out of me the way it is used. Prof Gray could have written that whole article and never used the word strategy one time. He could have substituted the word wise, wisely, appropriate or a a phrase like 'course of action' or not used the word at all and the article would been just as good and rather more clear. Even Prof Gray mixes things up when he talks about a simple general theory of strategy and adds (or war). What is meant by strategy is just intelligent or wise action guided by some homework and brainwork.
That is more or less what your two long comments were about too, in my view; they were about the things we did that were dopey and how we could have done some things that weren't so dopey.
The word had some utility in the past but now I think it has lost it. The way people use it it is as if it is some kind of magic thing that will fix all if only we could think strategically and act so too. That gives it a sort of mystical quality that doesn't advance the discussion in my opinion. I think it much more useful to say something is unwise or stupid instead not being strategic.
So much for that. The paper made 3 extremely good points. None of them are shining revelations, but small wars have been fought for a long time so there probably aren't any shining revelations that didn't occur to the first or second Pharaoh. But the points are stated extremely well and result in a "Aha! Of course. How come I couldn't see it and say it like that?" moment, at least for me.
The first is his point about any and all endeavors in small wars are political. You do nothing but battalion sweeps, H&I fire and air strikes and that is political. Not smart maybe but it is just as political as a shura every morning and a jirga every night.
A second is that the insurgent can mostly afford to get the warring part wrong and still prevail. The incumbent government though cannot. They have to get the warring part right or they lose. That doesn't mean they will win but if they get that part wrong, they will, shura as shootin', lose.
The third is extremely important and is about political, cross border sanctuary. He says that if the benefits of shutting down the sanctuary aren't judged to be worth the costs, you had better rethink the whole thing and probably give it up.
Bookmarks