Originally Posted by
Rifleman
Unfortunately, in struggling to articulate my thought I chose a phrase from a source that comes under much scrutiny from board members here. Bear with me, I'll see if I can explain myself a little better.
It seems to me that at a tactical level sometimes an operation needs to be conducted based on recent information. This might need to happen even if the operation does not contribute to a strategic objective.
For example, a drug strategy might center around prevention and treatment, not interdiction. Still, at a local level, you may get a tip about a meth lab in your jurisdiction. Taking down the lab is a tactical operation that will probably contribute little to the strategy. You need to take it down anyway.
So intelligence pulled you to a tactical course of action different than the strategic course of action that the policy makers were pushing.
Am I making sense or just rambling away? It seems like this would relevant to small wars. Am I wrong on that?
Bookmarks