Concur, but we should also remember that this same sort of thing happened after Vietnam. No more limited wars was the cry then, and we're seeing the same sort of thing now. We're also seeing a bit of rehash of "any good soldier can deal with guerrillas." Maybe yes, maybe no, but it's always helpful to have reminders of what can work and what is a really bad idea floating around somewhere.Originally Posted by jcustis
"On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War
Winding down the "big small wars" in Iraq and Afghanistan might be an opportunity to devote more attention to smaller small wars around the world, including those in which the US is not an active participant. It might also be an opportunity to advance discussion of the policy issues surrounding the decisions to enter small wars or assist the combatants. There's no shortage of material for discussion there, and there will certainly be useful observations of Iraq and Afghanistan long after we leave.
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary”
H.L. Mencken
Sheesh. The world is on fire. If global financial situations don't take an upturn, there will be a ton of small wars. There is so much going on everywhere that just doesn't receive conveniently viewable coverage here. I like anything on here from someone who is actually doing things, although it is hard to tell, people don't really put their C.V. On every post. I was surprised to see this subject after a long absence, I was thinking that asymmetric warfare was the new norm, and SWJ in a great position to be right on it.
A point of view to ponder
I had this comment via a PM and have the author's consent to use this. It reflects their long-time membership and long absences from posting.
In my opinion, the vast majority of posts could be grouped into 3 bins: 1. submission of ideas and articles rejected by other publications, 2. retired mil folks with an axe to grind, 3. trigger pullers arguing over low tactical issues. While those discussions are interesting, I would rather see a discussion of more operational/strategic level items and issues. I have always appreciated the ability of members of the SWC to answer RFIs that no one else seem to be able to answer. I see SWC as a forum to try out ideas on an educated audience, thus tolerate responses that are predictable in order to get the one or two that are true gems. I would love to see discussions on what our options are regarding NATO, Israel, Iran, Mexico, Nigeria, etc. I would like to see more historical analysis of past small wars and what the true lessons are/were, and of what utility they are to us today. Just a few thoughts.
davidbfpo
I am often amazed at the clarity of 'non-participants'!
The basic structure around here is good - Journal, blog and council. They have each developed a character of their own and as such should attract a different group of readers/contributors. The web stats would be the guide as to which attracts how much attention.
Within the council there should be a place for discussions on 'low level tactics' and individual weapons (for those interested) as well as opportunities to discuss or just read (lurk) stuff on different subjects.
Why are there so few contributers on the council? Perhaps the first is that people tend to post as themselves and (in true military fashion) are not prepared to speak out against the official line in open forum. There can't be a discussion where everyone agrees. Perhaps some want to use their presence here to boost their reputation (in some way). Then my favourite beef about moderators. Moderating online discussions is a skill - it is more guiding and setting a direction for the discussion than merely playing the quick-draw sheriff.
Finally, let and encourage people to find a home here for information of their personal interest (remembering this is not some preparation for a promotion exam where the stuff here is required reading). Let people enjoy themselves.
Last edited by JMA; 02-04-2012 at 06:37 AM.
I hope the content stays around. Ive been using this site as reading since becoming part of the military and as I progress towards my first career goal, this site has given me resources and places to look for information on current conflicts, history and non us perspectives. Most everything we focus on is at the tactical level, even the "uw" stuff. For me personally, the debates help me frame much of what I've been exposed to in the mil more effectively.
Wyatt
I do hope that the SWJ/SWC continues to have the excellent article and posts that are current.
It is a treasure trove of opinions and commentaries as also links to other articles of import.
I don't think SWJ/ SWC can fade out.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks