Kinetic vs Empathetic Warfare

[TROUFION]

"Meeting with his North Vietnamese counterpart, described by McNamara as "a wonderful man named Thach," almost 30 years after pulling out of Vietnam, Thach still insisted that America's mission was to colonize and enslave the Vietnamese. Thirty years later, McNamara couldn't convince his former enemy that we believed we were there to protect them from Communist control. In all those years of conflict and killing on both sides, we had never successfully communicated to our enemy why we were fighting and killing them, and we were unable to empathize with what they were experiencing as a civil war. Thach felt they were fighting for their independence and we were fighting to enslave them. Total misunderstanding is the result of failure to empathize. We must learn to find out why we're so hated and make an attempt to understand each other."--Dr. Wayne W. Dyer

Empathetic vs Kinetic Warfare

Kinetic Warfare: warfare that resembles weapons which achieve their
destructive effect by the shear force of their impact; distinguished
in the terminology of modern warfare, from those which do damage by
blast and heat or arrival at the target. (U.S. Joint definition).

Empathetic warfare: To attack the willpower and resistance capacity of
an opponent through the capacity to understand, being aware of, being
sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts,
and experiences of an enemy of either the past or present without
having the feelings, thoughts, and experience fully communicated in
an objectively explicit manner. (Definition taken from NPS Thesis Progressive Reconstruction).

My intent here is to discuss a potential difference in warfighting technique. Although it could just be a fancy way to say know thy enemy.
-T