Yet it’s a term more commonly heard in the media today promulgated by the nations defense planners and used often in reference to the war on terrorism.
Asymmetric warfare is merely the application of exclusive, creative, and unusual techniques with the intention to defeat a technologically superior and numerically enemy. It will take many forms including combat and p…
Asymmetric warfare is really as alien to common 21st century Americans since the Martian landscape.
Yet it’s a term more easily seen in the press in these days promulgated by the nations defense planners and used quite frequently in mention of the war on terrorism.
Asymmetric warfare is simply the use of distinctive, creative, and unconventional practices with the intention to defeat a numerically and technologically superior enemy. It takes several forms including psychological warfare and combat.
The 9/11 assaults and bombing of the U.S.S Cole were types of using this sort of warfare as were the new verbal assaults by Venezuelan and Iranian presidents upon the United States at the UN.
While asymmetric rivalry has its origins as far back while the Trojan Campaign in Ancient Greece and Hannibals attack on Rome, it was Americans that brought it to a fine art form, if not a real science.
Some have stated that asymmetric warfare is as American as apple pie.
Hardly any military historians would dispute that the Continental Army of the Revolutionary War and the Army of Northern Virginia throughout the Civil War fostered forms of uneven war at its best.
The guerrillas Francis Marion (the Swamp Fox) and Daniel Morgan (hero of the Cow Pens) went General Cornwallis from South Carolina. On a grander scale General Washingtons success at Trenton was a fine exemplory case of this sort of warfare. So was Stonewall Jacksons Valley of John Mosbys exploits and Virginia Campaign during the Civil War, not forgetting Douglas MacArthurs island hopping campaign during World War II.
A major the main new Rumsfeld Doctrine embraces the idea of asymmetric warfare to such a high degree that it’s changing Americans worldwide defense posture on a basis. It’s no secret that top brass within the Defense Secretary and the Pentagon are locking horns over the issue on a group of retired generals, as well as a really regular basis raising alarm bells.
Our leaders reveal that asymmetric warfare is just a new and unproven area of military effort employed by terrorist cells and terrorist nations bent on our destruction. That we won’t fully understand and grasp the nature of the Islamic fundamentalist head — and have never experienced this type of determined or fanatical enemy.
Some one must tell that to the children who served on those aircraft carriers in the South Pacific throughout World War II. These Japanese kamikazes and kaitens were in the same way dedicated for their Emperor as Islamic fundamentalists are to Allah.
We couldn’t stop those crazy Japanese prepared to sacrifice their lives in the name of these cause and neither can we stop the dedicated Islamic radicals bent on fighting our homeland.
The difference today is theres no Harry Truman at the helm.
That simple farmer from Missouri knew the mind of the octopus had to be destroyed in order to end the carnage being induced in the central and south pacific theaters of war.
Therefore he did — effortlessly and rapidly.
And this begs the question.
Just how long are American leaders planning to allow terrorist concentrated nation-states to finance and use asymmetric warfare — through their proxy organizations such as al-Qaeda — against the United States and continue steadily to divert attention from the more important strategic issues accessible, such because the growing Chinese threat?
Some say it is a diversionary ploy designed to shift the publics attention away from other important dilemmas such the environment, industry problems, job losses, and income stagnation.
The Bush Administration wants us to trust the war on terror is a multi-decade long struggle requiring a redeployment of American defense resources far from cold war postures.
U.S. Control comes with an personal understanding of asymmetric warfare.
If it doesn’t interdict the usage of this lethal kind of tactical warfare against Americas important interest immediately, employing whatever means required at its disposal — nevertheless unpleasant — it’ll fundamentally employ a negative impact on both the economic and military institutions of the nation and a profound influence on its political stability as well.
And maybe thats what our enemies need in the end. And then your octopuses of the entire world may eat that apple pie for desert.
To know more about it, please go to: go here