That would be a complex wargame with a lot of competing agendas. A lot more than a binary action, reaction, counteraction.
That would be a complex wargame with a lot of competing agendas. A lot more than a binary action, reaction, counteraction.
"Law cannot limit what physics makes possible." Humanitarian Apsects of Airpower (papers of Frederick L. Anderson, Hoover Institution, Stanford University)
Brant
Wargaming and Strategy Gaming at Armchair Dragoons
Military news and views at GrogNews
“their citizens (all of them counted as such) glorified their mythology of ‘rights’… and lost track of their duties. No nation, so constituted, can endure.” Robert Heinlein, Starship Troopers 1959
Play more wargames!
I've played "wargames" since I can remember, but I have a slight issue with the idea of a "game". In combat, you can have winners and losers. The end states are easy to define and the limits can be pretty well understood. The "game" analogy works and is de-facto professional education
The issue here I suggest is with "Simulations". Simulations have limits, and as I see many limits to what "gaming" can contribute to the human and social side of the issue we call COIN.
Trying to "game COIN" might be like trying to "simulate" marriage just using an inflatable sheep. The lack of realistic responses would show up pretty quickly!
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"
- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
I won't touch the inflatable sheep comment but in terms of simulating marriage, isn't that what 2nd Life is supposed to do? I've never tried it but read plenty about people who literally have a simulated marriage online. Personally one real one is enough for me...I'd rather hunt "tangos" if I'm playing online.
Along that thought process, however, is using something like a 2nd life simulation to mirror COIN. You can replicate every type of personality in a known AO, have events from a car bombing to an election drive and best of all, you can run this over a looooong period of time. For example: you know your unit is deploying somewhere next year. You have an idea of the AO (always subject to change of course). About a year out, you inject your key leaders into this 2nd Life environment. Even an hour a day whether from work or the house over the course of a year would help them build up a huge knowledge base based on actual people, locations and events. If kids sitting at home on a Saturday night can design these types of environments, why can't STRICOM and the military?
May be worth a look. Thoughts?
"But the bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet withstanding, go out to meet it."
-Thucydides
The recent COIN Leaders seminar at the CAC Ft Leavenworth was a great intro to how actual ground-up intel can (and should) be used to model complex COIN scenarios. Combined with a knowledge of basic insurgent strategy it is then relatively straightforward to forecast likely insurgent actions and come up with pro-active rather than reactive strategy on all fronts- military, social, economic and political. Gaming such scenarios was an eye-opener to all that attended.
On a side note, counter-strike and ghost recon fans out there might be interested to see that Hezbollah has their own version: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Force
The interplay between globalization, media, and insurgency is always fascinating...
I've been a "gamer" all my life, beginning with military board games and going right up through MMORPG's (World of Warcraft being the most recent). I agree with Wilf that "simulation" is probably a more accurate term, though I would suggest "model," at least for certain types of "games."
Like any simulation or model, there are limits to what it can do and there are some things that simply can't be modeled/simulated very accurately. In my experience, those un-modelables are often the human and leadership factors. I think we're all in agreement that those human factors are preeminent in insurgency/COIN, so for that reason alone I think games/models/simulations will have less utility in COIN than, say, naval warfare. In other words, it's easier to simulate hardware than it is to simulate people.
Couldn't agree more. It is definitely possible using some basic modelling techniques however to ID the various stakeholders in a COIN scenario and predict their most likely courses of action.
I think one of these days I'm going to have to write an article about "Game" v "sim" and their best uses in training/learning - already did a bunch of this for my dissertation... I just need to cut it down to a consumable size.
Brant
Wargaming and Strategy Gaming at Armchair Dragoons
Military news and views at GrogNews
“their citizens (all of them counted as such) glorified their mythology of ‘rights’… and lost track of their duties. No nation, so constituted, can endure.” Robert Heinlein, Starship Troopers 1959
Play more wargames!
Bookmarks