Posted on 09/28/2001 11:22:01 AM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
Subject: General Answers a Cadet
The following was an email answer to a D/Social Sciences Cadet at USMA from a distinguished instructor in that Department.
Question from Cadet:
Sir, I was hoping you could describe what you think the United States should consider as an "endstate" on the matter of dealing with terrorists? Eradication, containment, or some other option? And what would the United States consider the literal and figurative center of gravity? Thanks for your time.
General's Answer:
Great issue to consider...we have too liberally borrowed from the language of science to deal with the imperfections of political and security analysis. There will be no endstate...we will, if successful, manage this chronic threat to our survival, economy, and self-confidence by dramatically lowering the risk. We will build a series of defensive programs that will make a multiple order of magnitude increase in our day-to-day security.
Second, we will form a coalition based on common danger. Much of the globe will join us to leverage foreign intelligence services and security forces to fight these FTO's forward in the battle area. Finally, we will at last take the gloves off and use integrated military power to find, fix, and destroy these organizations.
We are going to disrupt these people thru preemptive attack...we will deceive them, we will run psyops on them,..... at selected points and times they will be killed suddenly, in significant numbers, and without warning. Tomahawk missiles, 2000 lb laser guided weapons dropped from B2's or F22's at very high altitude, remote control booby traps, blackmail, and at places...small groups of soldiers or Seals will appear in total darkness ..blow down the doors and kill them at close range with automatic weapons and hand grenades. We will find their money and freeze it. We will arrest their front agents. We will operate against their recruiting and transportation functions. We will locate their training areas and surveil or mine them. We will isolate them from their families. We will try to dominate their communication function and alternately listen, jam, or spoof it. We will make their couriers disappear. If we can find out how they eat, or play, or receive rewards, or where they sleep...we will go there and kill them by surprise.
The military component will be a supporting but lessor aspect of a strategy that will be based fundamentally on diplomatic and economic leverage to compel cooperation with international law. Of prime importance, we must reduce the environmental factors that feed this type of extremist madness.....foreign aid must be dramatically increased to address the misery and poverty of the Palestinians, the Afghan's, the Sudanese and others.
We must also not be unwilling to confront the State sponsors of terror..Iraq, Iran, Sudan, Cuba, North Korea....none can be allowed to provide the base for another sickening strike against our civilian population or our Allies. Conventional military power will be used at the end of the day to place at risk those states who present a direct threat to our security. If deterrence does not work with coherent political and economic measures in support of a threat capability...then their political will must be shattered with overwhelming violence directed at their armed forces and the political decision-makers.
The big challenge will be to organize America to protect our transportation, our economic activity, our entertainment...etc with minimal invasion of our privacy and our free movement. We will constrain domestic law enforcement through the protection of our Judicial System. We will ensure the unfettered operation of a free press. We will have to be zealous to protect the Bill Of Rights and the dignity and safety of foreigners living among us during this War. We can do all of this. We have no option. The American people will depend on you and your fellow soldiers to step forward and stand between us and the barbarians.
I share your confidence.
The Bush team may be doing this right. What happens after he leaves office? This policy can be made into another SS, KGB, or other super-secret 1984-ish police state with barely any effort whatsoever. This just gave me chills. Now--whenever a James Beck or someone else they disagree with appears, they can just kill him with NO due process--and call him a terrorist. End of case.
Yeah, I thought the screenname was a little suspicious. Too bad the likes of him have nothing better to do with their time.
I think you make the giant leap from tee box to green on a par 5 with a 7 iron on this statement bud. "It's in the hole"
Seriously, I think that we will need watchdog orgs and private citizens like yourself to keep the ship straight..............kinda like we have right now :' )
Your own concerns about the eveolution and development of an SS type org. are precisely the values and beliefs that many Americans have and this should make you sleep better at night. Other folks in other countries wouldn't ever be given a choice.
Excellent question! It has been said that, if not for the Berlin Wall falling, Bill Clinton would never have stood a chance of being elected. The presidency was primarily seen as the source of opposition to the Soviet Union and prosecution of the Cold War. All presidents served in the armed forces. (Though Reagan's service was limited, his "cold hawkishness" made up for it.)
You will not see a credible Democratic presidential candidate without significant military service. Kerry's antics in the Vietnam war probably even disqualify him: American's want to be reminded of sacrifice and patriotism and not dissention.
We have 3 more years with Bush at least. Long term solutions can be put in place later. We are now working to stave off the immediate threat.
You are living proof that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing!
Hmmm.......describes yu well. Anyone who finds a need to camp on one aspect of a post which isn't even the central issue is desperate for a platform. This post stands alone, with or without the connection to Rush. I only included his name because I assume others may have heard him read the letter and would be interested to read it again.
It is you and your type that are truly pitiful. It is laughable that you see yourselves as sitting above the rest and possessing some unique insight. You aren't creative enough to be productive so you latch onto posts for the sheer sake of being negative. If that isn't pathetic, I don't know what is. I seriously doubt you worked for Reagan and it is easy to make such a claim here. But even if it were true it is not an automatic testament to your character. Invoking Reagan's name is usually a stab at giving one credibility that can't otherwise be claimed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.