Page 8 of 16 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 318

Thread: Wargaming Small Wars (merged thread)

  1. #141
    Council Member AmericanPride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    "Turn left at Greenland." - Ringo Starr
    Posts
    965

    Default

    errr... Seriously, can we do this? Is it possible for SWC to run a "simulation."
    It's certainly possible from a programming/development side. This model or this one (admittedly with more development time) I think would be very effective. Some games are also a mix of the two, using basic coding to augment the will of the controlling game administrators.
    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

  2. #142
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
    . I am seriously not touching that sheep...
    Good. You can get your own!
    Last edited by William F. Owen; 09-18-2008 at 03:57 PM.
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  3. #143
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    223

    Default

    Let me set aside my skepticism for a moment. Assuming anybody asked me for my input on a proposed "COIN simulator" useful for training, say, captains through colonels, I would tell them this:

    "First, don't try to sell me on the virtues of EU2, HOI, etc. I've played those and others like them. While they are deep as games, they are paper thin as simulators. Playing EU2 constantly for a year won't make you Metternich or Marlbourogh. It only makes you an expert at playing EU2.

    "Second, from a practical perspective, the idea of having somebody enter the simulation four hours a week for a year to be trained seems a little weak. That would be, oh, 208 hours of immersion, or roughly 8 days on the ground if continuity is maintained. In other words, not very long in the COIN world. And how would continuity be maintained for the individual if the simulation is an on-going affair like WOW or 2nd Life? If you want more of their time, then you really begin to impact their duties and training in the real world. I guess I'm trying to visualize the practical aspect of this from a training perspective. Soldiers in a COIN op don't just wander around the world - they have units to lead and bosses to respond to. If one of their platoon leaders is also a real person, how do you ensure the two are in the sim at the same time? I could go on and on but won't. You may consider it nitpicking, but if some of you are interested in getting the armed forces to commit to such a game, you need to be prepared to integrate it into their real-world training requirements. Frankly, I would prefer to be able to drop people into the game for a week or two weeks at a time, with the ability to accelerate time so that they can experience 4-6 months of game-time.

    "Third, I agree that there doesn't need to be 'victory conditions', only some means of comparing start-state to end-state. More than that, the cause-effect linkages need to be nebulous so that participants can't learn 'the system'. In other words, NPC reactions should be unpredictable within a certain range of outcomes. Perhaps the 'rules' should change at random intervals. We want to ensure that it doesn't teach the participants that there is a 'right way' or any such thing as a 'silver bullet' in COIN.

    "Fourth, how do I monitor their progress and give them feedback? Frankly, I don't trust the idea that they will pick up lessons or insights on their own. I need some way of having 'the trainer' or 'the mentor' either in the sim or able to teach outside the sim. In WOW, if you never get past Level 2, nobody cares; I can't see investing time and money in your game if you can't guarantee the participants will become Level 60 Paladins.

    "I am assuming the vast majority of entities in the game will be 'bots. Are we talking about a single, continuing universe to play in? Or will their be a number of separate 'zones' or 'instances'? If so, how do we monitor each separate zone and populate it with role-players? How do we ensure that the game world doesn't gradually morph into an environment not conducive to our training objectives?

    "I don't mean to be discouraging. I'll concede that you can create a useful simulator. I remain skeptical that something like Battlefield 1942 or 2nd Life:Insurgent! is a practical tool that the armed forces can incorporate into its training regimen. You would have to convince TRADOC or JFCOM that investing 10% of an individual's training time over the course of a year, while maintaining the server farm/staff/role players/physical plant required, will result in a discernible improvement in performance."

  4. #144
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by William F. Owen View Post
    Good. You can get your own!
    No comment.

  5. #145
    Moderator Steve Blair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eden View Post
    "Second, from a practical perspective, the idea of having somebody enter the simulation four hours a week for a year to be trained seems a little weak. That would be, oh, 208 hours of immersion, or roughly 8 days on the ground if continuity is maintained. In other words, not very long in the COIN world. And how would continuity be maintained for the individual if the simulation is an on-going affair like WOW or 2nd Life? If you want more of their time, then you really begin to impact their duties and training in the real world. I guess I'm trying to visualize the practical aspect of this from a training perspective. Soldiers in a COIN op don't just wander around the world - they have units to lead and bosses to respond to. If one of their platoon leaders is also a real person, how do you ensure the two are in the sim at the same time? I could go on and on but won't. You may consider it nitpicking, but if some of you are interested in getting the armed forces to commit to such a game, you need to be prepared to integrate it into their real-world training requirements. Frankly, I would prefer to be able to drop people into the game for a week or two weeks at a time, with the ability to accelerate time so that they can experience 4-6 months of game-time.
    This is not especially hard to deal with. Time compression is a pretty normal thing in the non-WOW type games. It's also pretty easy to model units. My framework would also be a moderated free-play style game, with as many teams as possible represented by real people making non-programmed decisions within the framework of the game.

    If you break away from the WOW model (which is actually a latecomer to this sort of thing) you'll find environments that are much more structured. These are usually MUSHes or something similar (text-based as opposed to graphics-based). I also have yet to be convinced that you couldn't run some sort of COIN simulation with a set of teams and a White Cell functioning to moderate region interaction and deal with action results.

    If you don't believe such a thing can work, that's fine. But I would also suggest that you're missing some very interesting training opportunities in the process.
    "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

  6. #146
    Council Member AmericanPride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    "Turn left at Greenland." - Ringo Starr
    Posts
    965

    Default

    "First, don't try to sell me on the virtues of EU2, HOI, etc. I've played those and others like them. While they are deep as games, they are paper thin as simulators. Playing EU2 constantly for a year won't make you Metternich or Marlbourogh. It only makes you an expert at playing EU2.
    Point taken. I only aimed to assert that complex games modelling different theories of power, war, or what-have-you simultaneously are possible. Of course the specifics will take on a different shape in a COIN simulation -- the level of depth and complexity necessary is nonetheless attainable. Some kind of balance between "game" and "simulator" is necessary -- too strict of a simulation will not provide, in my opinion, sufficient flexibility to explore possibilities and contingencies. Too much of a game will, of course, push the realism envelope into absurdities.

    Frankly, I would prefer to be able to drop people into the game for a week or two weeks at a time, with the ability to accelerate time so that they can experience 4-6 months of game-time.
    That seems like a practical suggestion, given the training intent of a COIN simulator.

    More than that, the cause-effect linkages need to be nebulous so that participants can't learn 'the system'. In other words, NPC reactions should be unpredictable within a certain range of outcomes. Perhaps the 'rules' should change at random intervals. We want to ensure that it doesn't teach the participants that there is a 'right way' or any such thing as a 'silver bullet' in COIN.
    Having unknown variables which are difficult, or impossible, to know would provide, I think, a layer of unpredictability. GPS, for example, lets you know the basic personality traits of key leaders, but there's no certainity that Person A will, for example, accept a bribe, or having accepted it, do what was requested of them; or having rejected it, leak it to the media. I don't think a wild variable need be as dramatic or fundamental as "rule-changing", as it is possible for the program to roll a die so-to-speak.

    Fourth, how do I monitor their progress and give them feedback? Frankly, I don't trust the idea that they will pick up lessons or insights on their own. I need some way of having 'the trainer' or 'the mentor' either in the sim or able to teach outside the sim.
    Point taken. I should have specified my original comment or worded it differently. My mistake. Players shouldn't, of course, learn in isolation; I meant to say that players can learn different things dependent on what course they pursue provided its in a sand-box type simulation. The lessons will come out afterwards to when the players/trainers explain why the end-state looks the way it does, and whether that's desirable or not. Modelling a specific theory of insurgency will only tell players that the other models of insurgencies are invalid.

    I am assuming the vast majority of entities in the game will be 'bots. Are we talking about a single, continuing universe to play in? Or will their be a number of separate 'zones' or 'instances'? If so, how do we monitor each separate zone and populate it with role-players? How do we ensure that the game world doesn't gradually morph into an environment not conducive to our training objectives?
    Valid questions and I think that would depend on the model of simulation being used in the first place and practical considerations of who will be particpating, how many of them, and for how long. Some games have gazillions of bots, some have a few handful doing menial undecisive tasks, and some have none at all. I would imagine that the option to tailor these kinds of variables to the particular training objectives desired would be the most effective.

    Question: do you think Operation Flashpoint is a realistic, useful combat simulator?
    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

  7. #147
    Council Member AmericanPride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    "Turn left at Greenland." - Ringo Starr
    Posts
    965

    Default

    If I were tasked with designing a COIN simulator, this is what it would look like:

    1) Sand-box mode: an established framework to define player interaction, simulating a country similar to the Arab states; preferably a browser based system to mitigate admin bias, but a text-based game would be effective also.

    2) Each player would control a faction; there would be kinds of factions: political, paramilitary, and conventional military. Factions would be measured a credibility variable. More on that later. Factions would have a prescribed set of policies/causes which can be changed at great cost to credibility.

    3) Each faction type would have unique options and units. Player action would take place through these units. There would be many unit types with different capabilities, but each will be measured by common variables such as loyalty, leadership, religion, ethnicity, etc. This would allow for a wide combination of units (i.e. a US military faction and native military faction would share an Infantry unit type, but with different variables for them) and different kinds of interactions. This also allows factions to take on various shapes as the game develops. Some units could also be made available/unavailable depending upon a faction's policy/causes. Units can be killed, captured, turned, etc. Better units cans be recruited/assigned/purchased with higher credibility.

    4) There would be one country divided into regions, each region with different population elements defined by similar variables as units. This would make it more difficult for Faction X to operate in Region Y if it does not share with it a common identity. However, this can be mitigated (or exasperated) by a faction's credibility rating. The greater the differences between factions and the population, the more credibility is required to operate effectively. Each region will also have a prescribed set of "wants" similar to a faction's causes/policies.

    5) Holding local and national government positions (through units) would give factions more options; i.e. guiding infrastructure projects, lawmaking, etc. These options will also have an impact on a faction's credibility.

    6) If two or more player actions contradict (i.e. how to use a common resource or defining local policy), the decision always rules in favor of the unit with more (fire)power (for better or for worse).

    7) Game runs in real-time. No pauses. No time to think unless the player was able to create sufficient space and privilege for himself. Game ends when active players agree to call it quits.
    Last edited by AmericanPride; 09-18-2008 at 07:10 PM.
    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

  8. #148
    Council Member BayonetBrant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    261

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AmericanPride View Post
    If I were tasked with designing a COIN simulator, this is what it would look like:

    (snip)
    You might want to include some succes criteria and/or goals for each faction. Are they all after "control of population" or are they after something different? Maybe they're after 'removal of another faction' or 'control of a certain area' or 'resource'...

    You need to define success criteria/victory conditions FIRST and then look at the capabilities available to accomplish it for that group. And it wouldn't be the first time a group tried to accomplish something completely outside its capabilities...
    Brant
    Wargaming and Strategy Gaming at Armchair Dragoons
    Military news and views at GrogNews

    “their citizens (all of them counted as such) glorified their mythology of ‘rights’… and lost track of their duties. No nation, so constituted, can endure.” Robert Heinlein, Starship Troopers 1959

    Play more wargames!

  9. #149
    Council Member AmericanPride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    "Turn left at Greenland." - Ringo Starr
    Posts
    965

    Default

    You might want to include some succes criteria and/or goals for each faction. Are they all after "control of population" or are they after something different? Maybe they're after 'removal of another faction' or 'control of a certain area' or 'resource'.
    That would be measured by the prescribed policies/causes. Depending on the intent of the simulation (training or otherwise), the player can define them upon joining, or the game gods can define them (or a mix of both). The player would then be free to shape his faction however he thinks is most effective for fulfilling the cause(s).

    EDIT: Over the next couple of days, I'm going to start learning PHP. A basic COIN simulator will be an interesting project down the road.
    Last edited by AmericanPride; 09-18-2008 at 07:39 PM.
    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

  10. #150
    Council Member Ron Humphrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    1,099

    Post Hmmmm

    Quote Originally Posted by AmericanPride View Post
    If I were tasked with designing a COIN simulator, this is what it would look like:

    1) Sand-box mode: an established framework to define player interaction, simulating a country similar to the Arab states; preferably a browser based system to mitigate admin bias, but a text-based game would be effective also.

    2) Each player would control a faction; there would be kinds of factions: political, paramilitary, and conventional military. Factions would be measured a credibility variable. More on that later. Factions would have a prescribed set of policies/causes which can be changed at great cost to credibility.

    3) Each faction type would have unique options and units. Player action would take place through these units. There would be many unit types with different capabilities, but each will be measured by common variables such as loyalty, leadership, religion, ethnicity, etc. This would allow for a wide combination of units (i.e. a US military faction and native military faction would share an Infantry unit type, but with different variables for them) and different kinds of interactions. This also allows factions to take on various shapes as the game develops. Some units could also be made available/unavailable depending upon a faction's policy/causes. Units can be killed, captured, turned, etc. Better units cans be recruited/assigned/purchased with higher credibility.

    4) There would be one country divided into regions, each region with different population elements defined by similar variables as units. This would make it more difficult for Faction X to operate in Region Y if it does not share with it a common identity. However, this can be mitigated (or exasperated) by a faction's credibility rating. The greater the differences between factions and the population, the more credibility is required to operate effectively. Each region will also have a prescribed set of "wants" similar to a faction's causes/policies.

    5) Holding local and national government positions (through units) would give factions more options; i.e. guiding infrastructure projects, lawmaking, etc. These options will also have an impact on a faction's credibility.

    6) If two or more player actions contradict (i.e. how to use a common resource or defining local policy), the decision always rules in favor of the unit with more (fire)power (for better or for worse).

    7) Game runs in real-time. No pauses. No time to think unless the player was able to create sufficient space and privilege for himself. Game ends when active players agree to call it quits.

    The majority of these reflect a particular application that my former place of employ was trying out. They are a reasonable way of approaching the issue and offer a lot of good developmental steps towards an even more in depth program. The ultimate goal would be that it should be able to be small enough for smaller groups to work yet be able to expand in scope and detail to the point at which some of the products would be able to interact with existing training systems.

    Et All: I would think there are enough simulations of everything from economy, to peace negoatiations to admit that such a thing is definately doable. The very fact that it needs to avoid silver bullets makes it more so.
    I think the real questions are the following.

    Is it affordable? (not only in the sense of cost but also in consideration of is it worth it)

    Who should build it? (this really would determine whether what you get is what you need. Way too many issues with those building it having a somewhat biased approach on whats important vs whats extra. This however is probably unavoidable)
    Any man can destroy that which is around him, The rare man is he who can find beauty even in the darkest hours

    Cogitationis poenam nemo patitur

  11. #151
    Council Member AmericanPride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    "Turn left at Greenland." - Ringo Starr
    Posts
    965

    Default

    The majority of these reflect a particular application that my former place of employ was trying out. They are a reasonable way of approaching the issue and offer a lot of good developmental steps towards an even more in depth program.
    That's interesting because the points I outlined constitute the framework my buddies and I are using to build a simulation of the Dune universe. We're building the game using PHP coding which apparently can do anything. It's cheap (but not so easy).

    Is it affordable? (not only in the sense of cost but also in consideration of is it worth it)
    I've always wondered what makes military simulators expensive (off-hand, I read somewhere that to operate a carrier in a simulation runs up to a million dollars a day). That's absurd. Is most of the cost in the hardware? I've found very sophisicated online simulators that are very cheap to make and operate.
    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

  12. #152
    Council Member nichols's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Stafford Virginia
    Posts
    290

    Default

    It appears that there is a mis-perception about simulations in regards to small unit training.

    The large simulations are generally expensive because there is a hugh contractor tail that is needed to support an exercise.

    Games that you buy off the self at Walmart do not meet requirements for training.

    Current thread in getting military small unit simulations is buying/developing editors that allow the end user to change the game.

    Open APIs to allow third party AI insertion without having to go back to the original game developer.

    Currently the Corps is fielding DVTE suites (32 laptops per suite) to each battalion.

    While doing a neo op with an off the shelf AI package will effect the outcome of the scenario.......placing a system in the hands of the small unit that can be adjusted as needed will end up being part of the change over with the advanced party from the replacement unit.

    The ability to modify the AI to meet current situations on the ground with the ability to take pictures of individuals and put them in game; think about the effect this would have had if we were doing that since 2003.

    9 Innings at Quantico touches on the DIME aspects.

    We are much closer than some think we are to getting a COIN sim.

    Current draft infantry T & R Manual specifically call for simulation use to the point where it gets crp ratings.

    Gen Mattis is driving JFCOM full blown into the sim world, I get reps from JFCOM & NATO attending progress review meetings. Hell, I briefed MGen Skare (Swedish) two Fridays ago on what we're doing.

    Ultimately Gen Mattis wants a holodeck; yes, it is getting funded but it's gunna take some time

  13. #153
    Council Member nichols's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Stafford Virginia
    Posts
    290

    Default

    Portions of the last brief that I gave.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  14. #154
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default You do good work, thanks

    for the update...

  15. #155
    Council Member nichols's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Stafford Virginia
    Posts
    290

    Default

    More slides
    Attached Images Attached Images

  16. #156
    Council Member nichols's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Stafford Virginia
    Posts
    290

    Default

    The slide with ALTS is an example of where we are plugging in a differnet company's voice/speech recognizer/culture AI into VBS-2 via an open API.

    Now the Marines have to talk to the avatar...just imagine it talking to a native that doesn't understand english (I was trying to go the Dr Doolittle theme song foute....but I ran out of steam).
    Attached Images Attached Images

  17. #157
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Huge fan of VBS-2. I actually have a copy of the ADF version. It is an incredibly powerful and flexible tool.

    It is also an excellent way to teach Company and Platoon Tactical Doctrine, and show that some stuff just doesn't work!
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  18. #158
    Council Member davidbfpo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,366

    Default Is there a civilian option?

    Are there simulations / games that could be used for counter-terrorism training?

    I am aware of paper-based simulation exercises, principally to show outsiders (opinion formers, community leaders etc) how a CT operation works by "hands-on" learning. Used in London and Lancashire, possibly elsewhere.

    In-house training is sparse and gaming unheard of. A pity as UK CT has inceased in size rapidly and it's learning by doing.

    davidbfpo

  19. #159
    Council Member Jason Port's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Cary, NC
    Posts
    26

    Default Not out of reach.

    As you can see from Mr. Nichol's slides and from reading others works on this subject, we as a nation are not too far away from a technology and tactical perspective. We have the lessons learned, and the tech is not too far off. We simply are not good at the political side of this -

    1. The knowledge and the data - We have smart people working around the country on this topic and we have the data from the current operations which could be used to create a real time left seat right seat (Pull all of the combat events for the game AO up to 24 hours ago and use them in the sim)

    2. We have the models - There are smart folks around the country who have already modeled these pieces. They were built for similar programs and need to be extended.

    3. Systems facilitated engagements to minimize player count - With time compression, white teams who play multiple roles and system applied parameters against their character performance, we could achieve effectiveness without an army of white team players. e.g this one OC runs 10 insurgent cells, but the system applies factors for leadership, tactics, etc.

    4. Language-based issues - There are translation systems today which need extension to make this succeed, but this is critical. While conducting field interrogation in Bosnia, my translator failed to convey my tone, which results in no intel. Big impact on the outcome. But we are not that far away from making this part of the sim, but it must include understanding of the tonality of the speaker as well as the language itself.

    5. Mixture of math and chaos - 2nd Life brings some value in this way as I believe it applies a little of the math and a little of the interpersonal dynamic to the equation. Unlike Marriage, when you respond off the cuff, the sim marriage allows you to put on your best or worst face. We need to eliminate playing the sim how we think it should be played and play it first how we would really play it in real life. Then, learn from where we made mistakes. This is not about getting virtual tail in a virtual bar.

    6. Another author mentioned targeting the CPT and above. However, most of COIN is at CPT and below in the near term, and that is a key area to address in these sims. The Marine Corps really gets the fact that their Squad Leader is a key player in COIN and is clearly investing in it.

    HOWEVER, politics is killing us. As a systems developer, I have seen no less than four Requests for Proposal for similar games and simulations, all by different agencies (and I haven't even looked at Dept. of State or USAID.) In turn we are spending a ton of money, which this auspicious group could in fact develop the requirements for over a few beers, and some war stories.

    Because we cannot seem to cross lines, we are missing a crucial aspect which hasn't been discussed here at all - the impact of the global community on COIN, and how we "game" this into the Sim. What impact does the Asian World Bank play? Department of State? If you are the military sim developer, you might forget to include these in the day-to-day operation of the Squad Leader, until they build a factory where you wanted to build a soccer field. Or until the DoS rep mis-speaks and tells the tribal leader that the guys daughter looks like a hairless goat.

    I submit at the end of the day, the factors you all have pointed out should be consumed into a white paper and submitted into the hands of the nearest congressperson, for endorsement and funding, under the Executive branch directly, so as to remove the interagency domain protection shenanagans.
    "New knowledge is the most valuable commodity on earth. The more truth we have to work with, the richer we become."

    - Kurt Vonnegut

  20. #160
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    28

    Default COIN modelling

    If there was one thing that everyone at the recent COIN Leaders seminar took away, it was that the COIN CoG, IPB and ops planning processes can be modelled and gamed with only a few MS Word and Excel based tools.

    I don't necessarily disagree that sims might have their place and should be investigated, but they aren't necessary to the fundamentals.

Similar Threads

  1. Turkey mainly, Iraq and the Kurds (2006-2014)
    By SWJED in forum Middle East
    Replies: 181
    Last Post: 05-12-2014, 11:41 PM
  2. Inspirational Small Wars Quotes/Images
    By SWCAdmin in forum Small Wars Council / Journal
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-13-2014, 05:46 AM
  3. How effective have Arab armies been at 'small wars'?
    By davidbfpo in forum Middle East
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-10-2014, 10:57 AM
  4. How Insurgencies End
    By Jedburgh in forum Historians
    Replies: 113
    Last Post: 06-20-2011, 08:04 PM
  5. Small wars and Science Fiction
    By M-A Lagrange in forum Miscellaneous Goings On
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-29-2009, 04:56 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
  •