Here is another good article on the adaption of Warden's rings for use in Targeting in an unconventional environment.
http://smallwarsjournal.com/documents/grubbs1.pdf
Here is another good article on the adaption of Warden's rings for use in Targeting in an unconventional environment.
http://smallwarsjournal.com/documents/grubbs1.pdf
slap, at this rate practically my entire understanding of Aerial Campaigning will have come through reading Billy Mitchell, John Warden, and you and the pieces you put links up to.Originally Posted by slapout9
Sir, I have not yet begun to fight.
Starting to get into the good stuff here. Special Forces version of Targeting CARVER.
http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/new_pubs/jp3_05_1.pdf
Last edited by slapout9; 12-21-2007 at 12:29 AM. Reason: fix stuff
EBO sceptic and possible opponent
Well I see EBO has yet again changed, and become something else.
All EBO documents I read, I just cross out the words "Effects based", and see if it still makes sense.
Hurricane Katrina? Who was the enemy, the will of which, had to be broken. Who had to be defeated?
I attended a UK EBO workshop three years ago, and eventually got one senior officer to admit, that the logical extension of his premise was that he could legitimately mislead allied forces, if it created the effects he wanted.
That being the case, might someone progress this by giving me the current definition of EBO, or "effects based thinking," or "effects based planning."
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
In the targeting context
I'm not sure what to point out other than those in the dome who had to be encouraged to get out the hard way after assaulting and causing pain and suffering to others.
Having been there though I can tell you that there were a lot of effects which would have helped to move things along more smoothly and successfully.
How do you get parish presidents, and above to get off their I own this mentality long enough to address areas where only limited time to try clearing (searching) had been available so that civilian and military orgs could get to addressing them.
How do you get effective cooperation between various orgs ,local,regional,state, and federal when at every level there were entities working on separate agendas rather than one common picture, goal, intent (as it were)
The quickest effects based decision I saw shortly after getting there was the people at dominoe's pizza getting generators, pizza stuff and bottled water thereby openng their doors within three to four days after getting hit.
We got tired of pizza but they made a killing financially.
So how is any of that a product of "effects based thinking"?
This is leadership and common sense. That is what the military should create. Men who can impose their will on others in dangerous and difficult circumstances, to get them to do things they don't want to do or don't know how to.
I always come back to the same thing. How is anything "effects based" different from anything we ever did that worked? How does calling it effects based, make it better?
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
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks