Comments on: FDR – Raiding, Nation Building or a Bit of Both http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2009/12/fdr-%e2%80%93-raiding-nation-building-or-a-bit-of-both/ A progressive view on UK military affairs Fri, 10 Feb 2012 23:08:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Britain’s future strategic direction – And why I think Think Defence are wrong. « Jedibeeftrix's Blog http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2009/12/fdr-%e2%80%93-raiding-nation-building-or-a-bit-of-both/#comment-1298 Britain’s future strategic direction – And why I think Think Defence are wrong. « Jedibeeftrix's Blog Tue, 16 Mar 2010 13:01:34 +0000 http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/?p=1592#comment-1298 [...] FDR – Raiding, Nation Building or a Bit of Both [...] [...] FDR – Raiding, Nation Building or a Bit of Both [...]

]]> By: Jed http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2009/12/fdr-%e2%80%93-raiding-nation-building-or-a-bit-of-both/#comment-525 Jed Thu, 24 Dec 2009 15:44:23 +0000 http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/?p=1592#comment-525 I am all for a combined option 2 and 3 but non of option 1 at all - why ? Because our morally bankrupt politico's do not have the taste for nation building (and nor should they in my opinion) and its all about putting your money where you mouth is. As noted in other posts, a little more drawn here and there from other ministries and other progammes and the RAF could easily have over a 100 Chinooks, but there is no political will to do so. So our option 2 element must stick to stabilisation ops / peacekeeping. As to doctrine from Shrivenham, hopefully one lesson the Army at least learns from Iraq is that Northern Ireland experience is not universally applied, we are not cleverer than the Elmers (Elmer J Chickenshit the third, or our American allies) because at least they were able to adapt. Having been round major UK and multinational HQ's in a Psyops role it is astounding how much senior brass is hidebound and kinetic obsessed, how much they just don't get "information operations". I am all for a combined option 2 and 3 but non of option 1 at all – why ? Because our morally bankrupt politico’s do not have the taste for nation building (and nor should they in my opinion) and its all about putting your money where you mouth is. As noted in other posts, a little more drawn here and there from other ministries and other progammes and the RAF could easily have over a 100 Chinooks, but there is no political will to do so. So our option 2 element must stick to stabilisation ops / peacekeeping.

As to doctrine from Shrivenham, hopefully one lesson the Army at least learns from Iraq is that Northern Ireland experience is not universally applied, we are not cleverer than the Elmers (Elmer J Chickenshit the third, or our American allies) because at least they were able to adapt. Having been round major UK and multinational HQ’s in a Psyops role it is astounding how much senior brass is hidebound and kinetic obsessed, how much they just don’t get “information operations”.

]]> By: DominicJ http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2009/12/fdr-%e2%80%93-raiding-nation-building-or-a-bit-of-both/#comment-523 DominicJ Thu, 24 Dec 2009 00:37:03 +0000 http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/?p=1592#comment-523 "In Iraq could we have countenanced taking Basra and then withdrawing." Absobleepinglutly. Shock and awe, possibly scaled down a bit. Seize Basra Demand Sadam abdicates and someone who can rule effectively and has relatively blood free hands takes power, PR it as us aiding a rebel coup if that helps, worked in afghanistan. Hell, I'd be happy for Sadam to remain in power as long as he was suitable reminded of how quickly and easily we could remove him if we saw fit. "In Afganistan, could we have lobbed a handful of Tomahawks at AQ training camps and then went home?" Not exactly, but yes. Air power and special forces, along with Northern Alliance Ground Forces collapsed the Taliban Empire in two months. Would removing 90% of their territory from their control be suitable punishment for 9/11? I cant imagine new years eve 2001 anyone in Afghanistan seriously thought pissing off America any more was sensible. I'd be amazed if some of the people who thought it was a good idea to provoke America in the first place didnt wind up shot. There are several options for a strategic raid. Beat an enemy with a big stick until he becomes a vassal, or at least gives up trying to fight us. Beat an enemy with a big stick and support a coup Beat an enemy with a big stick and support an allied invasion Beat an enemy with a big stick until he's dead “In Iraq could we have countenanced taking Basra and then withdrawing.”
Absobleepinglutly.
Shock and awe, possibly scaled down a bit.
Seize Basra
Demand Sadam abdicates and someone who can rule effectively and has relatively blood free hands takes power, PR it as us aiding a rebel coup if that helps, worked in afghanistan.
Hell, I’d be happy for Sadam to remain in power as long as he was suitable reminded of how quickly and easily we could remove him if we saw fit.

“In Afganistan, could we have lobbed a handful of Tomahawks at AQ training camps and then went home?”
Not exactly, but yes.
Air power and special forces, along with Northern Alliance Ground Forces collapsed the Taliban Empire in two months.
Would removing 90% of their territory from their control be suitable punishment for 9/11?
I cant imagine new years eve 2001 anyone in Afghanistan seriously thought pissing off America any more was sensible.
I’d be amazed if some of the people who thought it was a good idea to provoke America in the first place didnt wind up shot.

There are several options for a strategic raid.
Beat an enemy with a big stick until he becomes a vassal, or at least gives up trying to fight us.
Beat an enemy with a big stick and support a coup
Beat an enemy with a big stick and support an allied invasion
Beat an enemy with a big stick until he’s dead

]]>