Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!
The World Affairs Board is one of the premier forums for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include foreign & defense policy, international security, military developments, weapons proliferation, terrorism, international strategic affairs, and politics. Our membership includes many from military, defense industry, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
|
 |
|
01-04-2006, 01:35 AM
|
#16 (permalink)
|
|
A Self Important
Senior Contributor
Join Date: 08-03-03
Country: 
|
Didn't see this thread until right now.
Quote:
|
Do you happenned to know why VN responded only in regt and not div strength a full month after the Chinese incursion?
|
Terrain, the bleeding ulcer in Cambodia (streched out) and risking putting up the level of the conflict is what my research points at. In 1984 the Vietnamese military was faced with threats all over from Hmong guerillas, Khmer guerillas, the Thai military and the Chinese military.
Cambodia was a major limiter to the Vietnamese military as to the forces ready for another conflict or to rachet things up. Things were so bad that Vietnamese troops on the Thai border were often bombed and raided by the Thai military with sometimes no response back. Simply no one to send and being over streched and being unwilling to risk things going up a level. Yeah they crossed the border sometimes but when the RTA/RTAF/RTMC went into action the Vietnamese army basically took it.
The large and vaunted border forces on the Chinese border were nothing of note just lightly armed paramilitary forces and basically static. There were only so many combat ready units already taking away from forces in Cambodia and Laos and forces guarding Hanoi.
Now in all honesty this is far from my area of research (more on the Cambodian invasion and occupation and the 1st Indochina War then the wars with China). Tragically I have so little time to give the time to the research fully some of these conflicts. |
|
|
|
01-04-2006, 15:34 PM
|
#17 (permalink)
|
|
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
Join Date: 08-06-03
Country: 
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ray
I have not read "Unrestiricted Warfare". I will google that and have a look.
|
Sir,
Unrestricted Warfare by PLAAF Senior-Colonel Qiao Liang and PLAAF Senior-Colonel Wang Xiangsui
I should point out, Sir, that both SrCols are Propaganda Officers and that Unrestricted Warfare was not every well received (downright dismissed actually) by PLA Field Officers themselves.
My biggest complaint about the book is that you cannot see the trees from the forest. Details are lacking.
A brief summary
Quote:
Unrestricted Warfare - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Weaknesses of the United States
The book notes that the primary weakness of the United States in military matters is that the US views revolution in military thought solely in terms of technology. To the US, military doctrine evolves because new technology allows new capabilities. As such, the United States does not consider the wider picture of military strategy, which includes legal and economic factors. Since no consideration is put into these aspects, the United States is vulnerable to attack along these lines.
[edit]
Alternative methods of attack
Reducing one's opponent, the book notes, can be accomplished in a number of ways other than direct military confrontation. The book notes that these alternative methods "have the same and even greater destructive force than military warfare, and they have already produced serious threats different from the past and in many directions for...national security."
[edit]
Lawfare
Lawfare, or political action through transnational or non-governmental organisations can effect a policy change that would be impossible otherwise. Because of the international nature of the modern world and activism, it is much easier for nation-states to affect policy in other nation-states through a proxy. An example of this would be the instruction given to al-Qaeda operatives ordering them to claim to have been tortured while in western captivity. Oftentimes, they will be released due to political pressure brought on by activists.
[edit]
Economic warfare
Thanks to the interconnected nature of global economics, one nation can inflict grievous harm on the economy of another nation without taking any offensive action. The book cites George Soros' role in the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis. Soros, a currency speculator, sold a great amount of stock in currencies of several East Asian Nations, contributing to a large devaluation. Similar attacks can be taken by a nation for ideological reasons.
[edit]
Network warfare
One of the better-known alternatives in this book is the idea of attacking networks. Networks are increasingly important in not only data exchange but also transportation, financial institutions, and communication. Attacks that disable networks can easily hamstring large areas of life that are dependent on them for coordination. One example of network warfare would be shutting down a network that supplies power. If there is a significant failure in the power grid caused by the attack, massive power outages could result, crippling industry, defence, medicine, and all other areas of life. Network Warfare was most famously used against the United States in the 2002 game Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell, when Georgian President Kombayn Nikoladze uses network warfare to attack the United States and disable its infrastructure.
[edit]
Terrorism
Another famous instance of Unrestricted Warfare policy is terrorism. Terrorism is used by a group to gain satisfaction for certain demands. Even if these demands are not satisfied, a terrorist attack can have vastly disproportionate effects on national welfare. One only has to look at the economic crisis that followed the terrorist attacks against the United States, or the extensive security measures put in place after those same attacks. Terrorism erodes a nation's sense of security and well being, even if the direct effects of the attacks only concern a minute percentage of the population.
[edit]
Defence against unrestricted warfare
The authors note that an old-fashioned mentality that considers military action the only offensive action is inadequate given the new range of threats. Instead, the authors advocate forming a "composite force in all aspects related to national interest. Moreover, given this type of composite force, it is also necessary to have this type of composite force to become the means which can be utilized for actual operations. This should be a "grand warfare method" which combines all of the dimensions and methods in the two major areas of military and non-military affairs so as to carry out warfare. This is opposite of the formula for warfare methods brought forth in past wars."
[edit]
Implications
As the authors state, the new range of options combined with the rising cost (both political and financial) of waging traditional warfare results in the rising dominance of the new alternatives to traditional military action. A state that does not heed these warnings is in dire shape.
|
__________________
Chimo
|
|
|
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 18:07 PM.
|
| 
Similar Threads
