Ritualisierte Kriegsführung - Reale Kriegsführung

[Quintus Fabius]

Anbei eine Studie (mit großem Dank an Tiger, der sie mir ursprünglich zur Verfügung gestellt hat):

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB1076.pdf">http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.ar ... UB1076.pdf</a><!-- m -->

THE NEW AZTECS:
RITUAL AND RESTRAINT IN
CONTEMPORARY WESTERN MILITARY
OPERATIONS

Das folgende ist ja schon eingetreten:

A further implication of this style of warfare is that future military operations will be driven by public opinion and politics more than by policy.

Leaders, ignorant of the realities of war, try to limit the political harm flowing from an unpopular operation by heavily restricting the methods used in order to minimize the casualties and costs.

the West continues to demand that its forces treat its enemies with extraordinary respect, take maximum care to avoid collateral damage, and even avoid the killing of enemy combatants, the end result may well be an increase in the public cachet of the enemy. Expectations determine perceptions.

Und beschließend eine These, die ich gerade in Afghanistan und im Irak bestätigt finde:

First, there is the question of whether or not ritualized and restrained methods of conflict are actually counterproductive on the battlefield, especially when fighting a foe whose methods are unrestrained. The second is to question whether or not restrained methods have the unintended effect of extending the duration of wars, which in turn increases the overall harm inflicted by the conflict. If this is so, then by trying to limit the brutality of war, the West may make it ultimately even more harmful

Der krampfhafte Versuch, so wenig wie möglich zu töten (mit immensem Geldaufwand möglich) führt am Ende nur zu noch viel mehr Toten - weil er den Krieg unendlich in die Länge zieht, ohne dass sich eine klare Niederlage der einen oder der anderen Seite abzeichnet.


Die meiner Meinung nach wesentlichen Kernpunkte:

Contemporary America, and by extension Western culture, is far more inclined to honor the dead but benevolent hero over the live but death-dealing hero. The military heroes of today are not those who storm machinegun nests and slaughter entire platoons of Taliban, but rather those who save others under fire.

The third element is the potential effect of such a style of warfare on the West’s future effectiveness. As noted, ritualized and restrained wars usually last a long time. Militaries may become so focused on these low-intensity, long-duration operations that their efficacy for other operations will decline.

the West will lose an accurate understanding of the nature of war. The longer it continues to fight in a constrained manner, the more normalized that methodology will become. The decisionmaking spectrum available to leaders for future military endeavors will be restricted to those low-danger, low-intensity options favored today.

Is there a Cortes awaiting the West today? Will we,the contemporary Flower Warriors, face a foe who, to be defeated, requires our willingness to kill, be killed, and fight to the bitter end? Is the current style of Western warfare but a mere historical blip, a momentary anomaly that will disappear when the world changes again? History cannot answer that question, but we had better be prepared to answer it ourselves.

Is there a Cortes awaiting the West today? Meiner Überzeugung nach ja.