Guest Post: Riccardo Bosi – Knowledge Dispels Fear

It was a hot day just before Christmas in 1990. I was travelling through Sydney in a taxi and the cabbie was listening intently to ABC news radio which was covering the build-up of tension between Iraq and the rest of the world.

Saddam Hussein’s armed forces had invaded Kuwait some months earlier, and was now threatening the mother of all wars should the US led coalition of 30 countries, which now numbered 40,000 and was building up in Saudi Arabia, attempt to remove his army by force.

When the news item ended, the cabbie volunteered that he was confused because there were so many contradictory versions of events in the Middle East. He just wanted to know, with some degree of certainty what was going to happen if the coalition went to war and that he wished there was just one news service that would ‘tell us like it really is’.

I sat there, resisting the very strong temptation to discuss his desire for a single source of news, and instead knowing that knowledge dispels fear, decided to oblige him.

“The war will be short, it will be brutal and we will win”.

He asked how I knew and how could I be so certain, so I gave him the short answer. I was an Army officer and that it was ‘what we do for a living’. I said that he was no different in that he could reasonably assess the time needed to travel between the airport and the city, taking into consideration variables such as traffic and motor vehicle accidents, because it was what he did for a living. Having had his need for knowledge met, he did appear less fearful but no happier, as is often the case.

Knowledge Dispels Fear is the motto of the Australian Defence Force’s Parachute Training School located at Naval Air Station – Nowra, on the NSW coast south of Sydney. That’s where I learnt it.

Knowledge dispels fear but it does not bring happiness. I also learned that at the Parachute Training School and you’d be surprised at the number of Special Forces soldiers who are not happy about jumping out of a plane.

I have been reminded of this motto many times since the Paris attacks, specifically whenever I have heard the leaders of western nations telling their populations not to be fearful and to go about their everyday lives, otherwise the terrorists win.

Sounds nice but the exhortations from politicians, a group not noted for their honesty nor trustworthiness, are falling on deaf ears and for good reason. The paucity of knowledge on the part of the people is prodigious. Our largely incompetent leaders are allowing the enemy, in this case ISIL, unfettered access to inform the media narrative. We are warned not to overreact lest we fuel ISIL yet it is exactly this absence of an effective counter message from western governments that is providing aid and comfort to the enemy and those who would support them.

So, given that our own Prime Minister is also Absent Without Leave on this issue, I will now outline a possible plan to the military problem of ISIL. Please note it is a possible ground war plan only, much simplified and built on many assumptions, but it is a workable solution to the removal of ISIL from the Levant. This is a necessary precursor to the rebuilding of Syria and Iraq, and the halting of the humanitarian crisis. My purpose is to dispel fear by providing the knowledge that ISIL is not an invincible behemoth which our leaders seem to believe it is, but rather just another adversary that will be defeated on the battlefield.

The plan follows the ancient approach of setting the anvil and swinging the hammers, and is as follows:

 PRELIMINARY OPERATIONS

Mission Secure boundaries

 PHASE 1

Mission – Secure Syria

 PHASE 2 

Mission – Secure Northern Iraq

PHASE 3 

Mission – Secure Western Iraq

See the maps below for further information.

Note: An international accord will be required prior to commencement of military operations and a possible solution will be discussed in a following article.

Ric 1

Ric 2

Ric 3

Ric 4

Ric 5

This entry was posted in Guest Post. Bookmark the permalink.

85 Responses to Guest Post: Riccardo Bosi – Knowledge Dispels Fear

  1. braddles

    Don’t forget Phase 4: maintain tens of thousands of troops on the ground for 20 to 50 years.

  2. Mike of Marion

    A great post RB – well done.

  3. Nice. Good skeleton plan. I like the killing the enemy part and all the bits about having a plan and doing it.

    But can the political-media classes of our civilised countries, who have heads filled with shit, align to do it?

  4. motherhubbard'sdog

    Exactly, Braddles. How long did the US keep troops in Japan? Germany? Korea? That’s what is required for ultimate success.

  5. daggers

    Japan, Germany and Korea are all successful precedents.

    Occupation would also allow control of oil assets. This would help pay the financial costs – jizya.

  6. BorisG

    No one doubts the ground war can be won. But it is not clear if it solves the problem of terrorism. Nor it is clear who will fill the power vacuum, especially in Syria.

  7. Roger

    A victory is easily achievable (assuming the political will).

    What comes next is the difficult part.

    Since America is exhausted and broke, occupation would fall to the Europeans…but I doubt they have the will for it either.

  8. Zyconoclast

    Japan, Germany and Korea are all successful precedents

    Middle Easterners will not behave like those listed above.
    Even after 50 years of military occupation, the mentality of the locals will be primitive and fatalistic. They will just be waiting for you to leave.
    You will have to demolish the mosques and ban the Koran. Brutal suppression of their religion will have to happen. Rewards to those who convert.

  9. Ragu

    Let the Russians and Chinese occupy the joint. They don’t give a toss about human rights, equal application of the law or silly ideas like ‘we the people’

  10. Bruce of Newcastle

    Conquering those areas of Iraq and Syria is strategically fairly pointless, for the same reason that hindsight shows conquering Iraq the first time and conquering Afghanistan was fairly pointless.

    It is possible to control such populations, but not via methods which we find morally acceptable. Putin achieved control using those methods in Chechnya.

    Because that is not something we should do, the option which fits best is Israel’s strategy. Riccardo – you will know well the excellence of Israel’s strategy and tactics. It is time to use those hard learned lessons in Iraq and Syria.

    The approach that would be taken is:

    1. Secure the boundaries, as in your preliminary operations phase.
    2. Determine appropriate frontiers
    3. Secure the frontiers of an ISIS territory in eastern Syria and western Iraq, analogous to Gaza
    4. Fortify those frontiers with a wall and outposts similar to Israel’s wall east of Jerusalem.
    5. Relocate aggressive populations to the ISIS territory where needed (eg enclaves of jihadis in SW Syria)
    6. Institute a program of judicial exile in the West whereby any seditious Muslims are taken to Syria and then released into the ISIS territory.

    The approach of wall-and-control is the one used by Hadrian for the unconquerable Picts and by the Wacht am Rhein for controlling the Germans. It is presently used by the Israelis to control the Gazans, with a slightly different approach for the West Bank (due to politics).

    Then the additional strategy used by the Israelis is this: when the Gazans attempt to raid outside their territory either by ground forces or by rockets, the IDF goes in and smashes everything of value owned by the leadership. This works. After a few rounds the leaders tend to suppress the jihadis as they don’t want their stuff smashed. So the same retribution would be employed in the ISIS enclave. If they act up, smash the Caliph’s stuff. I am sure after you do that several times he will find excuses not to allow his guys to attack out of his miserable province.

    And then, after an ignominious generation of isolation and misery, we might see the fire of the current Wahhabist fanaticism die down.

  11. Fat Tony

    Saudi Arabia is left out – why?

  12. egg_

    Putin achieved control using those methods in Chechnya.

    A puppet Dictator one can control (to some extent) viz. Saddam Hussein?

  13. Ragu

    A dictator that is either a WASP or fanatical Mongolian with a No Child Policy

  14. Chris M

    Hey good post sir.

    Personally I wouldn’t be keen to waste or even risk more good peoples lives fighting these scum – the fact is just like the vermin in that area in Old testament times they need to be entirely exterminated and the option of doing this from a distance by pressing buttons is attractive.

  15. jupes

    What are the rules of engagement?

  16. RB I got the Knowledge but didn’t dispel the Fear at Williamtown, so that makes me an old fart. Good Military Planning but BoN has the better strategy, I fear. Fat Tony asks the correct question, what about the Saudi Wahabbists who are at the heart of the matter. Should we just wall off Mecca? Isolation and overwhelming Punishment sounds better than occupation to me.

  17. Bruce of Newcastle

    A puppet Dictator one can control (to some extent) viz. Saddam Hussein?

    Egg – It is also the wrong strategy. Kadyrov controls his principality with force and terror…as a result something like half the population has been displaced. Bloodthirsty Chechens have popped up all over the ME, Dagestan, Ingushetia, Afghanistan and Pakistan causing all sorts of trouble.

    No the idea isn’t to kick them out it is to keep them in, like in Gaza.

  18. Driftforge

    The northern half of Phase one appears to be what the Russians are doing now, except they aren’t differentiating between purple and red, to the evident displeasure of Turkey, which will end up isolated from any potential gains by that Syrian/Kurdish corridor.

  19. Tim Neilson

    Bruce of Newcastle
    #1869598, posted on November 27, 2015 at 10:49 am
    Bruce, I don’t agree that conquering Iraq the first time was pointless. It became pointless as a result of the vanity and ineptitude of Barack Obama.
    Three times the Iraqis turned out in their millions to vote (for the provisional government, the Constitution and the first Constitutional government), despite terrorist threats. It’s very clear that they really wanted a chance to make modern democracy work. If that incompetent waste of space Obama hadn’t wanted a cheap “triumph” by racing the troops out as fast as possible, but instead there’d been a Truman like recognition that armed stasis for a long time was necessary, ISIS might well have been only another flea-ridden local militia in Syria, and Iraq would probably have been inching forward.
    As for Afghanistan, you may be right, but at the time getting rid of the world’s most fanatical terrorist supporting regime seemed like it was worth a try.

  20. egg_

    No the idea isn’t to kick them out it is to keep them in, like in Gaza.

    Yup – containment – by one of their own.

  21. notafan

    Squish islamic state like a bug. It would be a turn up for the books to see Turkey cooperating.
    I like new borders and Russian backed dictators.
    Islam is antithetical to democracy.
    I’m not sure if there is a place for the Christian communities in the middle east any more, perhaps a Christian enclave is possible in western Syria.

  22. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    Even after 50 years of military occupation, the mentality of the locals will be primitive and fatalistic. They will just be waiting for you to leave.
    You will have to demolish the mosques and ban the Koran. Brutal suppression of their religion will have to happen. Rewards to those who convert.

    There would have to be an almost permanent occupation while all traces of Islam are suppressed. An earlier poster suggested handing the area over to the Russians or Chinese. The Chinese would probably be the best option, with an excess of young men, as a result of the one – child policy , and their belief that Chinese culture is far superior to all others.

  23. Ubique

    The Chinese are a good choice as an occupation force as they’re the most experienced nation in the world at suppressing religion.

  24. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    I also learned that at the Parachute Training School and you’d be surprised at the number of Special Forces soldiers who are not happy about jumping out of a plane.

    Quite understandable – you choose to exit a fully serviceable aircraft, crewed by people qualified to do so, and maintained by people trained to do so, to trust your life to what is basically a folded bed sheet, and several hundred feet of string?

  25. I am the Walras, Equilibrate and Price Take

    I admire the hard work, Riccardo, but this is too complicated.

    Just build a wall around / seal off the whole area, supply the inhabitants generously with arms and ammunition, and wait for natural consequences to solve the problem for us.

    Starting with SAUDI.

  26. Bruce of Newcastle

    Bruce, I don’t agree that conquering Iraq the first time was pointless.

    Tim – I understood Rumsfeld’s hypothesis, which was if you could click Iraq over to democracy the advantages of the system would be self-reinforcing. Then the other countries around Iraq would fall domino-like into a democratic system under pressure from the now enriched population, or that was the idea.

    Unfortunately what was not understood (nor by me) was that the grand 200 year arc of Wahhabist activism was reaching maturity, just about hitting boiling point at the time of the invasion – the top fully blew off during the Arab Spring. So by sheer bad luck Bush invaded right when the Sunnis were most primed to go religiously nuts in a paleo-islamic way. The Shia of course were also still somewhat activist in the ashes of the 1979 revolution, so it was a double barrel explosion (fed gleefully by the IRG and industrially produced Iranian IEDs).

    It is possible to have a democracy in a religious country, but only if the religion is passive – like most muslims are in Indonesia. As soon as a critical mass become activist it becomes impossible – as we saw in Egypt with Morsi. Egypt has now reverted to the strong-man model that Iraq was before the invasion.

    Now that the Sunnis and Shia in the ME are so incensed with victimhood and religious fervour there is nothing that can be done other than to put a wall around them until they cool off. If they ever do.

  27. Cynic of Ayr

    The single, most outstanding, obstacle to such a plan, is the West’s obsession with “Human rights”
    “Human rights” insists that, no matter how detrimental or fatal to other “Humans” an individual or groups behavour or action is, the “Human rights” of the individual or group, is sacrosanct.
    Just ask Gillian Triggs, she’ll tell ya!
    And what determine “Humanism”?
    Is it behavour? No.
    Is it compliance? No.
    Is it some sort of “Human” ability? No.
    It’s simply DNA. A DNA that is 98.5–99.4 percent shared.
    And the poor old chimps? Nah, they don’t get “Chimps Rights” to about 98.5–99.4 percent of “Human Rights”.
    And yet, it’s funny, in that it seems to me that most people who are denied “Human rights” are the victims of the aforementioned individuals or groups.

    If a Chimp steps out of line, and behaves like a “Human” – biting, scratching, clubbing etc. – we shoot it! No trial or such niceties.
    There are many thousands, even millions of “Humans” who should perhaps be afforded only “Chimps rights”.

  28. Stimpson J. Cat

    It is refreshing to see someone posting diagrams in color for people like me.
    Good show.

  29. Fat Tony

    I cannot see the rationale behind not wanting to nuke Islam’s “holy” sites and major cities to show the inferiority of their Allah.
    Once they attain nukes, they will use them on us. Why wait??

  30. old bloke

    Ricardo, thanks, that was an interesting post.

    It seems that the Syrians are already moving to isolate anti-Assad forces along their northern border, hence the Russian air power together with Syrian Army activity along the Syrian – Turkish border. The Kurds have effectively sealed the Iraq – Turkey border already. Turkey isn’t happy with this situation, they are moving their tanks to the border and may attempt to cross over into Syria to defend the ethnic Turks living there, and to keep open the supply lines for ISIS. With Turkey’s border sealed in both Syria and Iraq, ISIS will wither on the vine with no more recruits, armaments and money.

    I don’t think anything else needs to be done.

    I would oppose any move for Western powers to intervene to establish foreign control of the Sunni areas now controlled by ISIS and the other rebel groups. If a democracy was imposed on them, they would probably vote for al-Baghdadi anyway. Iraq (the Shiite majority) appear to have no interest in recapturing “their” Sunni territory, and I don’t know what the minority Alawite / Christian / Druze / Shiite government in Syria want to do with their territory apart from sealing their borders.

    Western involvement would mean more “nation building”, which will be just another drain on Western treasuries for no long term gain. Just isolate them and keep them out of Australia.

  31. Driftforge

    If a democracy was imposed on them

    Given the disastrous results of doing so throughout the region, there is possibly not a more dire punishment that could be inflicted upon those lands.

  32. Filbert

    Von Clauswitz’s maxim was that war was a battle of will between commanders.
    Well that’s us fucked then.
    Seriously.

  33. Filbert

    Fat Tony.
    Trump might have the ‘will’ to nuke The Saudi sites.
    Imagine him standing next to two big red buttons, and stating “You’re fired!” as he smashes them both with his fist?

  34. Harry Buttle

    Re the occupation phase, combine a new idea with an old method of suppressing rebellion.

    DNA testing + reprisals. Properly targeted reprisals are the one thing a tribal society really fears and DNA testing gives you that.

  35. All good points and thoughtful opinions, thank you. Answers to most will be covered in the description of the international accord required to both precede and to follow such a military operation.

  36. Piett

    Riccardo, out of curiosity, what program did you use to generate the maps and draw the axes of advance?

  37. Leigh Lowe

    It seems inconceivable now, but I remember the lead up to GW1.
    Some of us were uncertain how it would go.
    But I distinctly remember almost every lefty commentators sagely predicting that Saddam’s “elite Republican Guard” would whip the GI’s arses, because they were “battle hardened veterans of the Iran-Iraq war”.
    Can’t remember how it panned out for the elite Republican Guard.

  38. Gab

    Excellent post, Riccardo. Only one problem, the Western nations won’t fight becuase it may involve killing the blood-thirsty murderers that form ISIS, you know, the enemy. Better give Putin a call.

  39. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    Can’t remember how it panned out for the elite Republican Guard.

    Provided target practice for the much ridiculed G.I’s. I remember all those sage predictions, too.

  40. John Comnenus

    I don’t think anyone would deny that a US led coalition could develop, resource and execute a plan of this nature. Unfortunately it is highly unlikely to succeed in destroying the ideology that motivates ISIS and alike groups.

    The only way to make such a plan work, and get out without occupation responsibilities, is to hand over Iraq to the Iranian Shia backed Government and hand over Syria to the Iranian Shia backed regime. Jordan, Saudi and Turkey won’t approve of or support such a plan.

    Alternatively we could just do the destroy ISIS piece, leave and let the chips fall where they will. This will be bloody and genocidal. But at least the most motivated will be killing themselves.

  41. Yohan

    Riccardo Bosi’s plan is sound and logical, but it makes a presumption about US middle eastern policy, that it’s actually based on US self interest.

    In reality, the only plan the US Neocon chickenhawks care about is Phase 1, which is removing Israel’s regional enemy in Syria’s Assad. This is why all you hear about since Paris is boots on the ground… in Syria. They could not care less about Iraq, and how its entire northern half is a failed state under ISIS.

  42. Empire

    Once they attain nukes, they will use them on us. Why wait??

    Pakistan already has 120 allahnukes. Granted the Paki govt isn’t ISIL, but that horse has already bolted.

  43. Muddy

    Kudos for the great post Riccardi Bosi. Obviously a bit of thought has gone into it, including the presentation. Bruce of Newcastle has put forward an interesting strategy, and one or two other posters have made sound contributions also. This is what I like about The Cat.
    The only thoughts I can put forward are that Australia’s military contribution to such a scenario as Riccardo paints can only be token (can we really call ourselves a ‘middle power’ still?), and that the ‘solution’ will only come from the region itself. Daesh will step on someone’s toes or be no longer useful to someone, I’m not sure who.

  44. Herodotus

    Yeah, but anyone who says it’s “”baddies versus baddies” will be ridiculed by the left media here.
    Media doesn’t matter, anyone?

  45. Adrien

    Mmmm interesting. Have you ever been in actual combat? Or a bar fight? Because I’ve never been in the first and only occasionally in the second (on St Paddy’s day – tradition) but I know a few things you don’t seem to.

    1. You can never be certain about the outcome of war. You may have been right viz the Gulf War but such certainties were expressed about the Iraq War 12 years ago and it’s only gotten worse.

    2. Operations are NOT strategy.

  46. Token

    I was in Los Angeles at the same time.

    A taxi driver was insistent the best way to deal with the threat was to invade Iraq & shave off Saddamm’s mustache and impose rules that he could not grow it back.

    I thought he was crazy.

    Watching the Sun King in action, I now know that he was a JV in the crazy department.

  47. Adrien

    Having re-read this I’m sorry but what a crock. Secure boundaries, secure Syria, secure Iraq. Oh so easy peasy.

    With all due respect Lt Col get a job.

  48. Bruce of Newcastle

    Adrian – Assuming you are commenting on Riccardo’s article you should also digest his website.
    He’s kosher.

    Apologies to Riccardo for checking – as a science type its ingrained.

  49. Stimpson J. Cat

    Since we’re going ahead with this invasion, I want a beret and you shall all refer to me as Comical Stimpy.
    Propaganda and marketing is my bailiwick.

  50. Bruce of Newcastle

    Ah I see you have checked his website. 🙂

    Differences of opinion are fine. That is what the Cat is for.

  51. Rob MW

    “Mmmm interesting. Have you ever been in actual combat? Or a bar fight? Because I’ve never been in the first and only occasionally in the second (on St Paddy’s day – tradition) but I know a few things you don’t seem to.”

    I’ll bet is was how to run the fastest 100 metres ever, possibly even treading mid air for grip.

  52. Stimpson J. Cat

    Mmmm interesting. Have you ever been in actual combat? Or a bar fight? Because I’ve never been in the first and only occasionally in the second (on St Paddy’s day – tradition) but I know a few things you don’t seem to.

    Adrien, you never having shot at someone and belting drunk Paddy’s is very interesting to be sure, but if you can explain how that invalidates and or is relevant to Ricardo’s plan it would be much appreciated.

  53. Gab

    Having re-read this I’m sorry but what a crock. Secure boundaries, secure Syria, secure Iraq. Oh so easy peasy.

    What a pissant. The least you could do is explain why you think it is a “crock”.

  54. Adrien

    Ah I see you have checked his website.

    Hence my ascertaition of his rank.

    Differences of opinion are fine. That is what the Cat is for.

    Whew! Glad to have your permission.

  55. motherhubbard'sdog

    The smart thing to do from a strategic perspective would be to encourage Russian involvement as much as possible, and do as little as possible. Rather than another Chechnya, it would likely turn out to be another Afghanistan for the Russians. Afghanistan may have been an expensive mistake for the US, for Russia it was a disaster.

  56. Harry Buttle

    Adrien, by what passes for your argument, nobody should ever set out on a military operation, because the result isn’t certain.

    However, ISIS has few options for repair parts above small arms level, less for genuine logistic support, has few well trained soldiers, even less competent specialists, limited heavy weapons, no possibility of even challenging in the air, and in theatre, because of the lack of air parity, would lose the ability to make significant strategic movements.

    So, in an invasion scenario as given above, the result is known – sure there will be some issues along the way, but if western Govts (ie the civilians who elect them) had the stomach for it, ISIS would be back to holding meetings in a basement quick smart.

  57. john constantine

    Pakistans nukes seem to be saudi oilfilth funded.

    Come the saudi revolution do the Pakistanis get to write off the debt, or do the oilfilth or the headhunters have a claim?.

  58. Fat Tony

    Empire – ” Once they attain nukes, they will use them on us. Why wait??
    Pakistan already has 120 allahnukes. Granted the Paki govt isn’t ISIL, but that horse has already bolted.”

    All the more reason to nuke Islam out of existence now – regardless of how many “innocents” die, it will be minuscule compared to how many innocents will die if Islam continues unchecked.

  59. .

    You’re a fucking idiot Tony.

    You want to kill 1.6 billion people to “save lives”.

    FFS.

  60. .

    Not to mention the nuclear exchange and second and third strike packages – and possibly nuclear world war.

    Fortunately Tony, you will never, ever be near the levers of power.

  61. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    Adrien, you never having shot at someone and belting drunk Paddy’s is very interesting to be sure, but if you can explain how that invalidates and or is relevant to Ricardo’s plan it would be much appreciated.

    I’m with Stimpy. My service career peaked at the rank of Lance Corporal (Unpaid, unloved and unwashed) but I’m sure that someone so high up the food chain would have done a proper appreciation before presenting such a plan. I’d be interested in your reasons for condemning the whole plan.

  62. Adrien

    Adrien, you never having shot at someone and belting drunk Paddy’s is very interesting to be sure, but if you can explain how that invalidates and or is relevant to Ricardo’s plan it would be much appreciated.

    I did. Isolating glib quibs out of context is not an argument. And the words is Paddies. Paddy’s is the possessive relating to thing that belong to Patrick.

  63. Adrien

    Adrien, by what passes for your argument, nobody should ever set out on a military operation, because the result isn’t certain.

    Harry by what passes for your rhetoric nobody should ever write a sentence because the result doesn’t make sense. I. Did. Not. Say. That. Kapisch? What I said is that drawing up a simplistic list of objectives and outlying a powerpoint bunch of arrows on a map in no way guarantees victory and that, in fact, there is no such guarantee. This post infers that it’s all so easy and after 14 years of war I kinda doubt that.

    So, in an invasion scenario as given above, the result is known

    Actually it ain’t. 14 years? Hello?

  64. Adrien

    My service career peaked at the rank of Lance Corporal (Unpaid, unloved and unwashed) but I’m sure that someone so high up the food chain would have done a proper appreciation before presenting such a plan.

    Ooooh who am I to question a Lt Col or even a Corporal? Well there was onceuponatime a fella with the rank of Captain and he was in the artillery and bit bit by he acquired a crown and conquered, well, a lot of places. He was one of them, y’know, geniuses and, guess what? He lost! 🙂

    He also had heaps of maps and arrows and, unlike the writer of this post, knew the difference between operations and strategy.

    I’d be interested in your reasons for condemning the whole plan.

    Because it isn’t a plan it’s a half-baked aspiration. Let me explain by analogy. I want to travel to the other end of the Milky Way galaxy. I have a map of the galaxy and an arrow from my end to the other; that’s not a plan because what’s missing is the ‘how’.

  65. Adrien

    The least you could do is explain why you think it is a “crock”.

    The least you could do is comprehend what you’ve quoted.

  66. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    Ooooh who am I to question a Lt Col or even a Corporal?

    It’s an old fvcking joke, you moron. Anyone who’s ever pulled on a boot, or picked up a rifle has heard it.

    Well there was onceuponatime a fella with the rank of Captain and he was in the artillery and bit bit by he acquired a crown and conquered, well, a lot of places. He was one of them, y’know, geniuses and, guess what? He lost! 🙂

    So, he had twenty three mistresses along the way. He must have done something right. That’s about as relevant as any contribution you’ve made.

    knew the difference between operations and strategy.

    The difference is between strategy and tactics. Professionals think strategy and supply. Amateurs think tactics and battles. Learn the difference. You will live longer, and not be-clown yourself on the Cat.

  67. Stimpson J. Cat

    Isolating glib quibs out of context is not an argument.

    I want you to read this again and have a long hard think about it. 🙂

  68. Adrien

    So, he had twenty three mistresses along the way. He must have done something right. That’s about as relevant as any contribution you’ve made.

    The relevance is that you can’t be sure even if possessed of genius. Obviously you’re either too dumb or obtuse or both to get it.

    It’s an old fvcking joke, you moron. Anyone who’s ever pulled on a boot, or picked up a rifle has heard it.

    When it’s pointed out to the stupid that they’re stupid they take the footy show defense: it’s a joke. No matter how manifestly lacking in humour. I’ve pulled on boots and picked up a rifle and it’s still a comment by a twit.

    The difference is between strategy and tactics.
    Is….?

    Professionals think strategy and supply.

    Ergo neither you Mr Corporal or our Lt Col above are professionals.

    Amateurs think tactics and battles.

    Did you get that from a Sylvester Stallone movie?

    Learn the difference

    I did. I don’t think you’ve got any idea. (Hint: You won’t find it watchin Rambo II)

    You will live longer, and not be-clown yourself on the Cat.

    Oooh so macho. Tone it down mate. Currency Lad’ll read it and his heterosexuality is already under threat from Vladimir Putin’s huge pectoral muscles. Now go and get those latrines dug or I’ll bust you down to private.

  69. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    Amateurs think tactics and battles.

    Did you get that from a Sylvester Stallone movie?

    Little bloke, with a black beret, Field Marshall Bernard Law Montgomery.

  70. Stimpson J. Cat

    Stimpy handy hint:
    It’s not the Monty on the Cat.

  71. Adrien

    I want you to read this again and have a long hard think about it.

    I can, in the interest of being actually understood, only recourse to Wilde:

    Lord Caversham: Do you always really understand what you say, sir?
    Lord Goring: Yes father, if I listen attentively.

    And as I only seriously on the first Tuesday of every month there ain’t much chance of me acontemplatin’ my glib quibs tonight.

  72. Adrien

    That’s ‘speak seriously’.

  73. Adrien

    Little bloke, with a black beret, Field Marshall Bernard Law Montgomery.

    Ah Monty WWII’s most over-rated general. Well done. Now if you knew what you were talking about you’d know that the difference between tactics and strategy is easy to understand and available from about 40 million websites including wikipedia and even your dictionary. I know it’s hard but with 20 minutes practice each day you will eventually be able to pronounce dictionary. Likewise if you knew what tactics were you’d know that “secure Syria” is neither a tactic nor a strategy. Just a basic goal.

    I could write on a piece of paper: ‘get rich’. But there’s no overall strategy (ie how, in general, I will build wealth) nor any tactics (what I will do, specifically, tomorrow in the attainment of wealth). There’s just get rich. I can write ‘get rich’ on paper. I can publish it on the web. I can make a powerpoint presentation with ‘get rich’ over and over again. It doesn’t make me rich. Get it?

    Of course not. Just dig the latrines and work on pronouncing dictionary pal.

  74. harry buttle

    Adrian, you are arguing with a group of military professionals, about military operations, based purely on your extensive use of Google. You have repeatedly made a complete fool of yourself but are so utterly out of your depth that you don’t even know you’ve done it. Amusing to watch.

  75. With the above, I believe we now have an example of The Flying Spaghetti Monster approach to military strategy.

  76. Adrien

    Harry –

    ‘s not based on Google1.
    2. My points remain unredressed by anyone. ‘Dipstick’ is not a rebuttal. ‘Secure Syria’ is not a strategy. And a bunch of arrows on a map are not victory. We have been at war for 14 years and our ‘military professionals’ have not exactly proven to be General Lee.

  77. Fat Tony

    Dot: “You’re a fucking idiot Tony.
    You want to kill 1.6 billion people to “save lives”.
    FFS.”

    OK fuckwit – look at the history of Islam – 1400 years of it – Islam will not stop until the whole world is under Islam or Islam is destroyed.
    It’s really that simple you moron.

    And you would save lives – billions of them in the future.

  78. Gab

    Still no reason given by Adrien as to why the proposed strategy, the topic of the post, is a “crock”.

  79. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    Secure Syria’ is not a strategy. And a bunch of arrows on a map are not victory. We have been at war for 14 years and our ‘military professionals’ have not exactly proven to be General Lee.

    “Secure Syria is not a strategy” – No, it would be given as the aim, or mission.

    “General Lee” – the same Robert E Lee, who surrendered the Army of Northern Virginia to U.S. Grant at Appomattox, in April 1865?

  80. Harry Buttle

    Adrien, you are so far out of your depth that you don’t even know the questions to ask.
    As a matter of interest, what do you think operational planning looks like?
    Your “points” remain unaddressed – you don’t make any “points”. you just make a fool of yourself.

  81. Combine Dave

    at 12:29 pm
    Dot: “You’re a fucking idiot Tony.
    You want to kill 1.6 billion people to “save lives”.
    FFS.”

    OK fuckwit – look at the history of Islam – 1400 years of it – Islam will not stop until the whole world is under Islam or Islam is destroyed.
    It’s really that simple you moron.

    And you would save lives – billions of them in the future.

    I prefer we modernise them against they will if need be and with zero tolerance.

    If any resist or play the underprivileged terrorism card, crush them

  82. Combine Dave

    No one doubts the ground war can be won. But it is not clear if it solves the problem of terrorism. Nor it is clear who will fill the power vacuum, especially in Syria.

    If Assad, backed by Russia’s elite troops on the ground, continues liberating the rest of the Syrian nation from Islamists there will be no power vacuum.

  83. one old bruce

    Colonise and exploit. By invading our countries they have forfeited their right to theirs, which should now be appropriated to pay for them and our inconvenience, plus profit.

Comments are closed.