In reading through your discussion of the failures of the NATSEC/DoD to comprehend influence let alone craft a rational and workable strategy for strategic influence operations I was reminded of a story told by Gen. Norman Schwartzkopf when he was a young commander in Vietnam. He was briefing Gen. Creighton Abrams on his village pacification plans to win the hearts and minds of the local Vietnamese to which Gen Abrams replied, “I've found that if you've got them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow.” While perhaps lacking in subtlety it captures the need for clearly defined goals and objectives as well as the tactics and strategies needed to achieve those goals and objectives.
My friend, I was hoping that you'd weigh in on this. Apologies for the late reply. Days now require more than 24 hours around here.
As we've discussed many times and are in full agreement of, the part of the natsec community that deals in influence continues to have their head, "where the sun doesn't shine." To make matters worse, they mouth the words about heart and minds but continue to throw, now billions behind defense contractors full of BS, faking expertise and doing more sales than contributing anything of value to the NSS.
For all the required study of Clausewitz and Sun Tzu, they never act on what they taught. Here are my comments to a new Atlantic article about the Afghan withdrawal that all sides seem to want to immorally, "play politics with." The original post is from Brian Steed, a friend and Narrative Strategies colleague who now teaches in retirement at CGSC/ Command and General Staff College.
People/ human beings are always the COG/ Center of Gravity. Too bad big defense contractors prefer bombers, ships and fighter jets. There is a role for these tools but they are damn near obsolete in insurgency operations.
You raise excellent points. You’re very bright and well-read. Every thinker, like other fields hits a plateau. The key to breaking through into the next higher level, is going deeper. I struggled mightily in analysis within my field until I went far deeper. Every generation of thinker that studies what came before, benefits from their predecessors. Understanding how WW I to WW II philosophers arrived at their beliefs is often as important as what they publish.
Just my two cents.
Thanks for the insightful and thought-provoking ideas.
Paul,
In reading through your discussion of the failures of the NATSEC/DoD to comprehend influence let alone craft a rational and workable strategy for strategic influence operations I was reminded of a story told by Gen. Norman Schwartzkopf when he was a young commander in Vietnam. He was briefing Gen. Creighton Abrams on his village pacification plans to win the hearts and minds of the local Vietnamese to which Gen Abrams replied, “I've found that if you've got them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow.” While perhaps lacking in subtlety it captures the need for clearly defined goals and objectives as well as the tactics and strategies needed to achieve those goals and objectives.
V/R
Doc B
My friend, I was hoping that you'd weigh in on this. Apologies for the late reply. Days now require more than 24 hours around here.
As we've discussed many times and are in full agreement of, the part of the natsec community that deals in influence continues to have their head, "where the sun doesn't shine." To make matters worse, they mouth the words about heart and minds but continue to throw, now billions behind defense contractors full of BS, faking expertise and doing more sales than contributing anything of value to the NSS.
For all the required study of Clausewitz and Sun Tzu, they never act on what they taught. Here are my comments to a new Atlantic article about the Afghan withdrawal that all sides seem to want to immorally, "play politics with." The original post is from Brian Steed, a friend and Narrative Strategies colleague who now teaches in retirement at CGSC/ Command and General Staff College.
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/paul-cobaugh-5253b335_the-final-days-activity-7102658002536595456-e4pR?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop
People/ human beings are always the COG/ Center of Gravity. Too bad big defense contractors prefer bombers, ships and fighter jets. There is a role for these tools but they are damn near obsolete in insurgency operations.
"Having people by the balls, in particular adults, creates rebellion, in particular in a populous determined to achieve self-determination."
Help me understand this please.
Rogelio,
You raise excellent points. You’re very bright and well-read. Every thinker, like other fields hits a plateau. The key to breaking through into the next higher level, is going deeper. I struggled mightily in analysis within my field until I went far deeper. Every generation of thinker that studies what came before, benefits from their predecessors. Understanding how WW I to WW II philosophers arrived at their beliefs is often as important as what they publish.
Just my two cents.
Thanks for the insightful and thought-provoking ideas.