Results 1 to 20 of 80

Thread: High Value Target HVT / Political Assassination

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,099

    Default

    JFQ, 1st Qtr 08: The Role of Targeted Killing in the Campaign Against Terror
    Targeted killing is “the intentional slaying of a specific individual or group of individuals undertaken with explicit government approval”. In recent years, targeted killing as a tactic in the ongoing campaign against terrorism has generated considerable controversy. Some commentators view it as an indispensable tool and argue for its expanded use, while others question its legality and claim that it is immoral and ultimately ineffective. The tactic of targeted killing is most closely associated with Israel’s campaign against the Second Palestinian Intifada. Since September 11, 2001, however, the United States has consistently conducted targeted killing operations against terrorist personnel.

    This article examines the legality, morality, and potential efficacy of a U.S. policy of targeted killing in its campaign against transnational terror. The conclusion is that, in spite of the genuine controversy surrounding this subject, a carefully circumscribed policy of targeted killing can be a legal, moral, and effective tool in a counterterror campaign. Procedures to guide the proper implementation of a U.S. policy of targeted killing are proposed.....

  2. #2
    Council Member SteveMetz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Carlisle, PA
    Posts
    1,488

    Default

    Keep this stuff coming, guys! As I may have mentioned, I think I'm going to do a paper on "high value targeting" for the RAND Insurgency Board.

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SteveMetz View Post
    Keep this stuff coming, guys! As I may have mentioned, I think I'm going to do a paper on "high value targeting" for the RAND Insurgency Board.

    Steve, I just happen to be available for consultation on this subject. My fee is some of your famous B-B-Q
    I highly recomend "Killing Pablo" by Mark Bowden of Blackhawk Down fame. I was really surprised at the stuff that made it into the book very detailed. The first target was not Pablo but his "Lawyers"

  4. #4

  5. #5
    Council Member zenpundit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    262

    Default Assassination of Enemy Leadership

    One rationale for avoiding assassination or targeting of enemy leadership for military strikes is that it can leave the "other side" with no one who is able to "turn the machine off" in the advent of surrender. This makes perfect sense in a conventional war of limited aims; in a total war or against non-state actors it may or may not be an appropriate. It depends on whom you are dealing with and the larger strategic picture.

    In WWII Japan had approximately 2 million men in its armies in China and Southeast Asia with a ferocious track record, even in engagements where the Imperial Army had taken a severe beating ( against the Soviets at Khalkin-Gol/Nomonhan and Chiang's all-out defense of Wuhan). It was feared by Allied leaders that these sizable forces would simply go down fighting even if the home islands fell. Therefore, Stimson and Marshall wisely kept the Emperor's palace off the target list for conventional bombing, starting with the Doolittle Raid, and Tokyo off the target list for the atomic bomb.

    In Europe, Allied intelligence was aware of the plot to assassinate Hitler by Stauffenberg's conspirators, thanks to Allen Dulles contacts with Gisevius and the Abwehr in Switzerland, but nothing was done to encourage the plotters beyond accepting their information. In contrast, British intelligence took out the dreaded SS intelligence chief, Reinhard Heydrich, via assassination not because of his crimes or intel role but because of his very effective ( in a political sense) occupational governorship in Bohemia and Moravia.

    In postwar eras, the U.S. and/or the CIA has been accused of complicity in the assassinations or deaths of Nkrumah, Ngo Dinh Diem and Salvador Allende. In each case, there were local actors with their own agendas involved in the overthrow who were beyond U.S. operational control ( and whose necks were in the noose if the coup failed). Where American control of such covert operations was direct, as against Arbenz in Guatemala and Mossadegh in Iran, no assassination actually took place. Operation Mongoose, about which much has been written, was a spectacular failure as Castro's continued existence in elderly dotage attests

  6. #6
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,099

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SteveMetz View Post
    Keep this stuff coming, guys! As I may have mentioned, I think I'm going to do a paper on "high value targeting" for the RAND Insurgency Board.
    Steve's presentation at the USAWC National Security Seminar:

    Strategic Decapitation and Counterinsurgency
    High Value Targeting

    High value targeting (HVT) holds appeal to the American public and political leaders.
    • Experts often contend that it doesn’t work

    • Truth is somewhere in between

    • Need a framework focused on strategic effects

    • Not operational and tactical requirements, legality, or morality

  7. #7
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default I think a more important quote is:

    "HVT more effective against early stage insurgents or those with limited regenerative capability.

    - - Governments unlikely to use HVT when it would be most effective."
    Simply because it highlights a problem that has essentially put us where we are today -- governmental dithering and failure to robustly respond to threats emboldens the attackers or others to increasingly dangerous action until massive effort is required. This invariably with more human, fiscal and political costs than would have been incurred had early, prompt and adequate action been taken.

    Steve is correct -- and five prior Presidents should have known better.

  8. #8
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,099

    Default

    JSOU, Sep 09: Manhunting: Counter-Network Organization for Irregular Warfare
    ....Manhunting—the deliberate concentration of national power to find, influence, capture, or when necessary kill an individual to disrupt a human network—has emerged as a key component of operations to counter irregular warfare adversaries in lieu of traditional state-on-state conflict measures. It has arguably become a primary area of emphasis in countering terrorist and insurgent opponents.

    Despite our increasing employment of manhunting, our national security establishment has not developed appropriate doctrine, dealt with challenging legal issues, nor have we organized forces and assigned clear responsibility to deploy and employ these capabilities. Were we to do so, manhunting could become an important element of our future national security policy, as highly trained teams disrupt or disintegrate human networks. Formally adopting manhunting capabilities would allow the United States to interdict threats without resorting to the expense and turbulence associated with deployment of major military formations. Manhunting capabilities could play a central role in the implementation of U.S. national security strategy in the 21st century....

  9. #9
    Council Member Tom Odom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    DeRidder LA
    Posts
    3,949

    Default

    Building a Manhunting Force for the Future
    The United States has not yet established doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership, personnel, or facilities needed to field a manhunting capability as a means to achieve its national security ends. Eight years after the 9/11 attacks, significant elements of our national security establishment remain polarized toward conventional, force-on-force warfare in order to combat massed mechanized military formations in a linear battle. But our adversaries have adapted, employing asymmetric capabilities to circumvent conventional capability.
    Once again an author takes an element of the fight, builds on it, hypes it and voila! a "new concept". I don't see much here beyond that. He has no grasp of what he refers to dismissively as conventional in the interest of hyping what he considers special.

    Tom

  10. #10
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    DC Metro Area
    Posts
    2

    Default Some good sources on this topic

    Brothers, I just registered/joined this forum, as this topic's of great interest to me, and I stumbled onto it this evening. I see some are contemplating a paper on the topic. Check out the following Wikipedia site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhunt_(military) -- lots of source material on targeted killing/HVT ops/manhunting/F3EA gathered in one place, with links where available. Think you'll find the sources and references most useful in this discussion. Also recommend Bill Roggio's "The Long War Journal." Bill posts some pretty up-to-date info, and analysis of "overseas contingency operations" (to use the current vernacular) at http://www.longwarjournal.org/

    Martyrdom... is the only way in which a man can become famous without ability. -- George Bernard Shaw
    Last edited by jcustis; 11-11-2009 at 04:11 AM.

Similar Threads

  1. Domestic political violence (USA)
    By slapout9 in forum Law Enforcement
    Replies: 102
    Last Post: 08-17-2019, 11:37 AM
  2. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 06-21-2018, 08:58 PM

Tags for this Thread

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
  •