Armed Forces of the World

“Armed Forces of the World” follows this important message from General (Ret.) Vallely.

Joint Strike Force Combat Operations

Excerpt from the SUA Lily Pad Strategy

By Paul Vallely

March 5, 2011

In increasingly complicated security dilemmas and threats, some nations are finally and overtly coming to grips with the reality that blunt military responses are the path to progress and victory whether it is against jihadists or Somali pirates. The engagement in an attempted “kinder, gentler war” to quell and restrict unconventional warfare is simply not working, nor should it have ever been expected to work in places such as Afghanistan (except the fall of 2001). After all, war is not the realm of benevolence — it is the realm of violence, and the whole point of engaging in war is to subdue the enemy’s will to fight to bring about a better situation than previously existed and achieve Victory over the enemy – to neutralize any threat to the United States and its people. War is not, despite what many experts are putting forth, some form of bridge and nation building contest.

Changing military doctrine so that soldiers become nation builders, construction workers, or worse, baby sitters, straddles the insane. Counterinsurgency (COIN) efforts have mutated into extremely costly and lengthy wars — wars that the U.S., for example, cannot sustain and makes no sense. If states battling violent and unconventional actors want to win (e.g. reach policy objectives), they must fully embrace certain strategies however unpalatable they may seem. This is where targeted warfare has come into play.

Targeted warfare, even as outlined in the Armed Forces Journal, from established lily pads, is simply a strategic and tactical warfare term that refers to the application of targeted terminations carried out by a state against unconventional, violent actors through various tactics — whether by drones, fighter jets, combat helicopter or special operations forces.

A targeted termination is a state-level, intentionally focused operation using every resource that intelligence agencies and armed forces have at their disposal with the objective of forcefully and permanently eliminating specific individuals and physical targets from the threat zone or at the very least deterring them from partaking in armed hostilities and aggression. While targeted warfare has and will continue to result in unintentional noncombatant casualties, it is overall the most surgical military force possible.

In fact, targeted warfare is probably the most humane application of warfare in the whole bloody realm of armed conflict. Despite this, much of the American military and political leadership, not to mention the American public, is being told that such activity is illegal, unethical and ineffective — none of which is correct. The U.S. is embroiled in what can be best understood as unconventional warfare. This is happening in Afghanistan, with hostilities occurring in areas of Pakistan and America’s Southern Border — the latter being the prime hot bed of violent, irregular and highly ideological and criminal militants. There are a number of other theaters of operations in which the American military is active and where targeted warfare should occur.

COIN is proving to be a better theory on paper than in practice, so the U.S. security establishment must return to other, more logical methods to eliminate the armed enemies against the United States and its assets.

There are other examples of a state engaging in correct strategy. The Israel Defense Forces and its symbiotic relationship with domestic intelligence and police agencies have resulted in necessary and effective targeted warfare against those who belong to armed organizations that use violence as a means to set policy. Even the Israeli High Court of Justice ruled in favor of the use of targeted warfare, albeit under specific conditions. That progressive ruling is recognition of unique security dilemmas facing the Israelis.

Nevertheless, this is not an article on the efficacy of targeted killings. Rather, this is about providing “recognitions” directly related to targeted warfare — recognitions on law, conflict, strategy and examples from others’ experiences in targeted warfare. The purpose of these four basic recognitions is to help bring a better understanding to a widely misunderstood topic to both military and political leadership and, in turn, the very people they are protecting: the American public.

Generally speaking, one of the major problems that Americans suffer from is the misunderstanding of the type of conflict in which they are involved. This misunderstanding leads to much confusion about an applied strategy of targeted warfare. For Americans, a surface-level explanation sees the mass media being the main culprit in confusion and living in what I call the “Sea of Ambiguity”. Reporters often borrow specific military terminology in a fast and loose manner, using terms interchangeably, applying multiple and varying terms at once, or simply using incorrect terminology. However, a deeper-level explanation can be understood as mainly emanating from three spheres: legal commentary, military leadership and a misunderstanding of the strategy. We need leaders (including the Admirals and Generals) now who are master planners and strategists that can frame Endgame strategies and tactics to secure America and lead us to peace and stability. Current warfare strategies do not lead us to that. We need a winning team more than ever!

Paul E. Vallely MG, US Army (Ret)

Chairman – Stand Up America

The quality of armed forces of the world ranges from frighteningly good to terrifyingly awful.

The countries represented by these world armed forces run the gamut from dear friends to uncompromising enemies.

The United States maintains a significant technological edge over most of the armed forces of the world.

There is a significant difference in the capabilities of an American soldier, upon whom the American taxpayer spends an average of $243K per year, and a $19K/yr Chinese soldier.

Perhaps even more importantly, the United States maintains a significant edge in troop training over the armed forces of hostile states.

As a military strategist, is is important to maintain a good knowledge level of all of the armed forces of the world. The armed forces of our nations enemies must be continually monitored for potential weakness. The armed forces of the friendly nations of the world must be constantly communicated with to ensure that when we go to battle together we do so in the most coordinated manner possible. Only through effective coordination can friendly casualties be held to the absolute minimums.

M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Apr
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31

Armed Forces of the World

Joint Strike Force Combat Operations

Share this:

Like this:

Email Subscription

Calling Islam “Islam”

Documentary “Iranium” is a disturbing reminder that Iran remains the truly imminent and terrifying threat to American interests and world peace.

* PETITTIONS *

Support St Nicholas Church NYC

Freedom and Liberty vs. Islam and Sharia

Tags

Archives

Blogroll

Follow “Freedom and Liberty vs. Islam and Sharia”