Page 20 of 33 FirstFirst ... 10181920212230 ... LastLast
Results 381 to 400 of 642

Thread: William S. Lind :collection (merged thread)

  1. #381
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    96

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Blair View Post
    Aren't headshots supposed to bring down zombies?

    4GW is nothing new...the only thing that is different perhaps is the pace of developments. Technology speeds up the process, both in terms of execution and commentary, but that's about it, really. WHO and WHY people fight has always been at the core of things, no matter what generational theory you subscribe to. Only someone who's ignorant of the history of conflict at all its levels would claim otherwise...or claim to have "discovered" that particular nugget.
    Double tap will bring one down, burning it with fire will keep it down

  2. #382
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob's World View Post
    Perhaps. I personally subscribe to the camp (sometimes a lonely campfire to sit around) that we never had this right to begin with. Certainly modern information technologies have (for now) tilted the advantage away from governments and to those population groups who would challenge the systems of governance (foreign and domestic, formal and informal) negatively affecting their lives.
    Except that is one of the concepts of 4GW, which is why they constantly point out that nobody has won one yet. And they also point out that it is not new..... just changing from the present nation-state based system "back" to the older kinds of warfare that used to be conducted.

  3. #383
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default William S. Lind Radio Interview

    2007 radio interview of Bill Lind.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hjQOMlpH9A

  4. #384
    Council Member TheCurmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Woodbridge, VA
    Posts
    1,117

    Default Hail to the new war, same as the old war

    I don't care for the Generations of War construct. Short of technological advances the changes have occurred mostly in the political world. Much of this "non-state" nonsense is the result of westerners drawing arbitrary lines on the ground to define states. Truth be told "Nations" (groups of people sharing a common identity, history, religion, and language) have always fought against "States" (political entities that claim a monopoly on legitimate violence within a prescribed portion of the earth's surface) when their beliefs about what it right and what is wrong clash.

    As for fighting for eternal salvation, I would suggest that that started long before the last century with the Crusades being the most well known example. Wars of identity - be it religion or ethnicity - have always existed.

    If I really wanted to argue generations of war, my construct would be based on human needs. The first generation wars, conducted primarily by hunter-gatheres, were over food and women. The second generation wars, which occurred through most of recorded history, were wars of collective identity. Nations against Nations (and sometimes against States). The third generation are wars of individual identity - wars for individual rights (democracy) and sometimes wars for religions that offer individual salvation (christian and Islamic wars in particular). These wars are the most savage because in these wars each individual has his own reason to fight. He does not need a tribal or political leader to push him forward, only an idea of what the ultimate truth is. Today, with the advent of rapid communications, these wars can spread like wildfire. There are no peace treaties in these wars. There is often no single leader who can claim victory or concede defeat. Only exhaustion and a temporary reprieve. Force has limited value. You can't kill your way to victory in these wars - you would have to kill an idea. Accommodation, if it is even possible, is probably the only way out of these conflicts.
    Last edited by TheCurmudgeon; 06-22-2013 at 02:40 PM.
    "I can change almost anything ... but I can't change human nature."

    Jon Osterman/Dr. Manhattan
    ---

  5. #385
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default Traditional Right

    William S. Lind has not just returned with an occasional article he now has a blog that he started on the 4th of July. Here is the Link
    http://www.traditionalright.com/

  6. #386
    Council Member J Wolfsberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    806

    Default

    As a follow on to the posts from Bob's World and The Curmudgeon ...

    Whenever "State" and "Nation" aren't perfectly congruent and homogeneous, you have the seeds for violence. That is as true today, e.g. East Africa and Tutsi vs. Hutu, as it was a couple millennia ago, e.g. Ionian Greeks vs. Attic Greeks.

    A second observation is that the weaker side will always fight "dirty," since they believe (rightly or wrongly) the rules get made by the stronger side and are always written to favor his interest.
    John Wolfsberger, Jr.

    An unruffled person with some useful skills.

  7. #387
    Council Member Fuchs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,189

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by J Wolfsberger View Post
    As a follow on to the posts from Bob's World and The Curmudgeon ...

    Whenever "State" and "Nation" aren't perfectly congruent and homogeneous, you have the seeds for violence. That is as true today, e.g. East Africa and Tutsi vs. Hutu, as it was a couple millennia ago, e.g. Ionian Greeks vs. Attic Greeks.

    A second observation is that the weaker side will always fight "dirty," since they believe (rightly or wrongly) the rules get made by the stronger side and are always written to favor his interest.
    Fighting "dirty" is not useful per se.
    I did once post a in my opinion more useful way of looking at this behaviour. It's not about 'rules'.

  8. #388
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default Bill Lind on Syria

    Bill Lind gives the 3 USA options for Syria and Egypt in the Middle East.



    https://www.traditionalright.com/the...-change-sides/

  9. #389
    Council Member TheCurmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Woodbridge, VA
    Posts
    1,117

    Default

    From a pragmatic point of view I would have to agree with Lind - up to the point of chemical weapons. We have made the mistake of backing the guy using the chemical weapons in the past and it made us look hypocritical later.

    We have backed the least best option in the past. The history of our foreign affairs during the Cold War was replet with th U.S. backing capitalist dictators against popularly supported representative communism. We are often willing to compromise our democratic principals for the "greater good".

    Here we are presented with a similar choice - support a secular dictator instead of a popular Islamic state. The choice should be clear. Perhaps we are changing the way we think or perhaps we don't see a religion that is practiced in the U.S. as a threat in the same way we saw communism as a threat. I don't know.
    "I can change almost anything ... but I can't change human nature."

    Jon Osterman/Dr. Manhattan
    ---

  10. #390
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,074

    Default Mr. Lind, May We Focus Our Rage Please?

    Mr. Lind, May We Focus Our Rage Please?

    Entry Excerpt:



    --------
    Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
    This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.

  11. #391
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,074

    Default The Continuing Irrelevance of William Lind

    The Continuing Irrelevance of William Lind

    Entry Excerpt:



    --------
    Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
    This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.

  12. #392
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default William S Lind and the US Officer Corps

    This thread refers to the article by William S Lind: An Officer Corps That Can’t Score

    Lind's article has been discussed on many blogs and around here but with IMHO too much emotion where the 'messenger' is attacked rather than what he said being analysed to see if the cap fits. I suggest that Lind may well be lughing and saying 'I told you so' at the quality of the responses to his article from members of the US Officer Corps.

    Perhaps in this thread contributors can attempt to analyse exactly what Lind said and agree or disagree in a constructive manner rather than with an emotional knee-jerk response? Here is my summary of what Lind stated:

    Lind starts with listing the recent wars ‘lost’ by the US military – probably to draw the attention of the serving military. He stated that unlike after the defeat in Vietnam which:

    …bred a generation of military reformers,’ … Today, the landscape is barren. Not a military voice is heard calling for thoughtful, substantive change. Just more money, please.
    Then expanding:

    Such a moral and intellectual collapse of the officer corps is one of the worst disasters that can afflict a military because it means it cannot adapt to new realities.
    Lind explains why it is so as follows:

    Why? … at the moral level—Colonel Boyd’s highest and most powerful level—our officers live in a bubble.

    At Boyd’s next level, the mental, our officers are not professionals. … The vast majority of our officers read no serious military history or theory.
    But officers are also victims:

    Officers are also victims of three structural failures,…

    The first, and possibly the worst, is an officer corps vastly too large for its organization—now augmented by an ant-army of contractors, most of whom are retired officers...

    Command tours are too short to accomplish anything, Decisions are pulled up the chain because the chain is laden with surplus officers looking for something to do. Decisions are committee-consensus, lowest common denominator, ...
    He continues:

    The second and third structural failings are …They are the “up or out” promotion system and “all or nothing”

    It is not difficult to see how these two structural failings in the officer corps morally emasculate our officers and all too often turn them, as they rise in rank and near the magic 20 years, into ass-kissing conformists.
    He summarises:

    Of these two types of failings, the structural are probably the most damaging. They are also the easiest to repair.

    Fixing the substantive problems is harder because those fixes require changes in organizational culture.
    He concludes:

    If American military officers want to know, or even care, why we keep losing, they need only look in the mirror.
    Does the cap fit?

  13. #393
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    One Matthew Hipple, a U.S. Navy surface warfare officer has been vocal in condemnation of Lind as follows:

    OUR DEBATING MILITARY: HERE IF YOU’RE LOOKING War on the Rocks

    (Peter Munson's response is a must read)

    and

    OUR DEBATING MILITARY: HERE, IF YOU’RE LOOKING on CIMSEC

    Does Hipple offer an effective counter to Lind? I think not.

    There is surely a difference between the sharing of opinion over a beer or in an Internet discussion group by junior officers and papers/articles that result in actual institutional change? I would have thought that would be obvious, yes?
    Last edited by JMA; 04-30-2014 at 07:34 PM.

  14. #394
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    A response by:

    BJ Armstrong is a naval officer, PhD candidate in War Studies with King’s College, London, and a member of the Editorial Board at the U.S. Naval Institute.
    GARDENING IN A “BARREN” OFFICER CORPS

  15. #395
    Council Member AmericanPride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    "Turn left at Greenland." - Ringo Starr
    Posts
    965

    Default

    I think the real issue is that despite all the debate, not much has structurally changed. As an Army officer myself, my concern is with the up-or-out system (not everyone wants to be a field grade officer). Having in-grade promotions like the federal civil service system would solve some of the issues that arise from abolishing the up-or-out scheme. Also get rid of key development positions. I also like the idea of a free agency for assignments though I think there should be reasonable limitations on time on station.

    Why are we as an institution investing in everyone to become a senior leader when (1) not everyone wants to be a senior leader and (2) not everyone will become a senior leader? Invest in those people who want it and clearly have the potential to do it.
    When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles. - Louis Veuillot

  16. #396
    Council Member TheCurmudgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Woodbridge, VA
    Posts
    1,117

    Default

    While I have said elsewhere that I disagree with the basic premise that we “lost” Iraq or Afghanistan because of our officer’s educational or personnel systems, I do believe that any system must change with the times. The Army officer’s education and personnel system is behind the times.

    1. We have not recognized the changing social structures and how those changes affect both the initiation and conduct of conflict. Gone are the days where we can eradicate a population as a solution to an insurgency, yet we still study military doctrine from that period. We are quick to recognize how technology will change war, we are slow to understand how social events are changing war even as we speak. Just look at the Ukraine. Putin can get what he wants without ever putting a tank on the battlefield by manipulating the population and using “self determination” as a first strike weapon. It can’t work everywhere, but it can work in some places. Our response - more tanks on the battlefield! Clearly we don't appreciate what is happening.

    2. Our officer personnel system does not allow for expertise to be retained where we need it. Everyone is on a command track. We need technician who understand systems, both technical and human. Our current system does not allow for that. They all don’t need to be LTCs, but they need to receive pay commiserate with their worth.

    That is enough for now.
    "I can change almost anything ... but I can't change human nature."

    Jon Osterman/Dr. Manhattan
    ---

  17. #397
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Selected responses from the An Officer Corps That Can’t Score article.

    ================
    John says:
    April 20, 2014 at 7:23 am
    It is easier to question Lind’s moral authority to make these observations than it is to refute their accuracy. …

    ================
    Philip Giraldi says:
    April 20, 2014 at 10:46 am
    I have been following this thread with some interest having served in the military during a long ago and now largely forgotten war and also having spent 17 years in CIA. I believe there are two distinct issues here – can the US military fight and defeat enemies, whoever they are and however they are designated. I think the answer is clearly yes. But wars are political, not purely military in nature and how wars are resolved is not necessarily a measure of the fighting capability of the armed forces. In that sense, we can win every battle and still come out with a lousy end-of-war scenario, which will be based on political considerations. In that sense, we lost in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan but the military is not necessarily to blame for the outcomes. …

    ================
    M. Henry says:
    April 20, 2014 at 4:31 pm
    As a serving officer, I want to thank our author for these on-point and accurate statements. And to every prior service using the lazy ad hominem attack with only their own anecdotal rosy memories to back up the complaints – you are only proving this article correct.
The use of “professional” to describe the bulk of barely educated ill-read officers is offensive. You do not need to break an arm to know it hurts; and you don’t need to serve to see a bureaucracy as ineffective.

    =================
    TBOU says:
    April 20, 2014 at 7:11 pm
    The decline of the war colleges might be to blame. Outside of the technical military schools (AFIT and NPS), the other military academic institutions are full of low standards. …

    =================
    bacon says:
    April 21, 2014 at 12:31 pm
    After 24+ years in the Army I can attest that the “up or out” policy leads directly and unavoidably to an end-of-career mindset of caution, just keep one’s head down and get thru the last 3 or 4 years. That mindset comes at a point when an officer has the most to offer and, sadly, the most to lose. I was fortunate in spending the last ⅔ of my career as a medical officer, a group just as privileged in the military as in private life and generally at no risk of loss of career from not being promoted.
    There is a potentially easy fix. Vest military personnel in the retirement system after 5 years of service, as federal law mandates for most nonmilitary jobs with approved pension plans.

    ==================
    Rick Johnson says:
    April 24, 2014 at 4:50 pm
    Lind doesn’t mention what affirmative action has done to the officer corps. If n officer who is a minority or a woman makes an accusation that they were denied the highest rating because of “racism” or “sexism,’ the rating officer’s career is effectively finished, despite any absence of proof beyond the accusation. Therefore, minorities and women are routinely given undeserved ratings and promoted. It is a cancer that has eaten away the moral fiber and courage of officers. No truly intelligent and honorable officer can survive in the present environment.

    ==================

  18. #398
    Council Member AmericanPride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    "Turn left at Greenland." - Ringo Starr
    Posts
    965

    Default

    JMA,

    I have to say that the last comment blaming protections for minorities is revolting.
    When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles. - Louis Veuillot

  19. #399
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Further comment on the Lind article:

    William S. Lind’s Grim Assessment of the US Officer Corps

    Concluding:

    I cannot help but notice the truth that rings from much of what Lind asserts. I have made some of those very same assertions myself on more than a few occasions. Give the article a read. What does the gang here think? Is Lind on target? If so, how do we fix it? Can it be fixed?
    Of the 23 responses at time of posting:

    ===============
    JoshO
    April 19, 2014 at 9:12 am
    Everyone should have to enlist. Then after at least two years or so of service officers could be recruited and selected from the ranks similar to the way we do with warrant officers. THEN the Army can send them to get the specific education that is required, not necessarily a degree. I feel like this would weed out a lot of the insincere and careerist political game players and people who are only looking for a way to pay for college. It could also be a good way reduce the officer bloat. A lot of jobs probably don’t need an officer to perform them anyway.

    ===============
    timactual
    April 19, 2014 at 2:19 pm
    ... We spend millions of dollars every year educating officers in every field but the one they work in; International Relations, English, MBA, etc. This does work out well for the officers, if not the military and the taxpayers, because it prepares them for lucrative careers as consultants, etc. when they leave active duty. ... I will bet money that less than 10% of the officer corps has a library card or even knows where the post library is.

    ===============
    Esli
    April 20, 2014 at 7:20 am
    As a serving officer with 5 years of enlisted and 19 years of commissioned service (and a library card from everywhere I have been, even though post libraries invariably suck), I’m going to say the generalizations are rampant here, but also that the concerns of over-politicization and a lack of serious study are legitimate. ...

    ===============

  20. #400
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AmericanPride View Post
    JMA,

    I have to say that the last comment blaming protections for minorities is revolting.
    Is it true though?
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

Similar Threads

  1. The Clausewitz Collection (merged thread)
    By SWJED in forum Futurists & Theorists
    Replies: 933
    Last Post: 03-19-2018, 02:38 PM
  2. The David Kilcullen Collection (merged thread)
    By Fabius Maximus in forum Doctrine & TTPs
    Replies: 451
    Last Post: 03-31-2016, 03:23 PM
  3. The Warden Collection (merged thread)
    By slapout9 in forum Futurists & Theorists
    Replies: 317
    Last Post: 09-30-2015, 05:56 PM
  4. Stryker collection (merged thread)
    By SWJED in forum Equipment & Capabilities
    Replies: 124
    Last Post: 05-25-2013, 06:26 AM
  5. The John Boyd collection (merged thread)
    By SWJED in forum Futurists & Theorists
    Replies: 218
    Last Post: 05-30-2012, 10:24 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •