For Martin Van Creveld Fans

[William F. Owen]

Then it gets worse. He argues that artillery should be the weapon of choice in counterinsurgency and uses Assad's destruction of the city of Hama as evidence.

One of the real problems I have with Van C is his use of Northern Ireland, compared with Assad and Hama to suggest that there are two valid models of COIN. This was swallowed whole by the 4GW folks, and then constantly cited as being empirical evidence, which it was not.

...and the the other issues\ this creates is how modern publishing corrupts military thought, but that, I suspect, is another thread.