I just binge watched several lectures by John Nagl and others who studied the conflicts from the past decade and a half. However, I didn't really get any satisfying information out of these lectures as these guys mostly talk about what mistakes were made by the different administrations and generally politics behind certain decisions in Iraq/Afghanistan . So my question is, do you guys know any literature, online lectures, online sources on the subject of counter-insurgency and lectures learned in the Middle East in these past years on an operational level?
>>29766128
http://www.meforum.org/441/why-arabs-lose-wars
>>29766156
Thanks for the link, sounds like a good read
>>29766128
*Lessons
>>29766128
"Militant Tricks: Battlefield Ruses of the Islamic Insurgent" by H. John Poole
The author gives examples of tactics/strategies used by the insurgents against the coalition in Afghanistan/Iraq.
>>29766156
>HUR DUR
>>29766163
I'm an actual vet and I reccomd you don't read either of these.
>>29766425
Poole is the idiot who claims that manuver in the face of firepower was a "Wily Asiatic tactic" when it's just plain logic.
>>29766594
Le ebin trul.
>>29766128
Anon would you share those lovely links?
I'll traded for tw- no, three different online libraries of stuff including counter insurgency, once I'm back on my pc.
>>29766606
>Telling the truth is trolling
>>29766128
A guerrilla army must first neutralize the major military force’s advantages of logistics, mobility and firepower, immobilize the major military force, it then procedes to bleed the major military force and finally shatter the brittle points in the major military force’s ability to hold territory and critical points. First don’t get killed, then fix in place, then put vulnerable points in exposed positions, and then deliver attacks with disproportionate effect. The occupation will end when the potential profits from the occupation are higher than the costs. Even if the major military force is “winning” on the ground, the key is to deny them the profits of occupation against the costs.
Fade-fix-bleed-shatter is the cycle of guerilla strategy. The major military has the inverse doctrine: ICA (Isolate, Concentrate, Annihilate).
>>29766623
>Telling the truth is trolling
>Hi I'm a nobody
>Don't listen to these people with backgrounds in the subject
>Listen me
>A nobody
If not trolling, very stupid.
>>29766615
Sure bro, here are some of the lectures I watched so far:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w0ypxEqYl4c John Nagl talking about pre-2006 situation in Iraq and development of counter-insurgency manual with Gen. Patreus and some other folks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uI-S7odN8tw More of the same
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1ZM3CfWh1I Gen. Mattis keynote
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaiqpVsF4rM A Harvard panel which goes more into philosophy and ethics of asymmetrical warfare
Every counter insurgency operation by "the west" in the last century has failed any anyone teaching it is this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d696t3yALAY
Here are the only successful proven counter insurgency models.
1. Kill everyone. No jokes, no edge. It's the only certain end to an insurgency.
2. everyone you don't kill goes in camps. But you still need to kill most of them.
3. Kill most of them put the remainders on reservations with stipulations that any attack would be an attack from their whole tribe and subsequently get them entirely killed off.
4. Don't invade in the first place.
>>29766594
OP here, is there anything you could recommend that is in public domain?
>>29766659
Ok, but the reality is that there is a wild insurgency out there which is promising to spread even further. Therefore I'm interested in where we are so far when it comes to effectively fighting it, and what methods are currently showing any success etc.
>>29766700
Literally fucking zero.
Permanently embedding SF units with rotation would be a good start. Basically warlord up the middle east.
Apocalypse now is probably the only alternative to an insurgency besides genocide.
>>29766659
>don't invade in the first place
What are you some kind of hippy faggot atheist Muslim communist
>>29766741
Radical Islamic insurgency is all kinds of fucked up to counter. These guys are literally suicidal, and don't care if they die for whatever their religious leaders tell the to. How do you even fight that? What incentive do they have to stop, become neutral, or in most extreme case switch sides?
This point alone is why I find this whole thing fascinating. It's like you're given a problem that has no solution, aside from legit extermination. But what then?
>>29766661
this is OC
The key to a guerilla movement is to use the mechanized and supply oriented nature of the occupation army against it. Speed isn't all, it is tactical surprise and striking at the jugular vein of oil and large road movement which is crucial. There is a hiearchical series of steps of sophistication, laid down by "The Swamp Fox" in the American Revolution: trap, strike, bleed and shatter.
The doctrine is to inflict damage at the periphery of the occupation, forcing it to over-extend itself. Then strike at the hard points of the over extension, in order to create a flow of unacceptable losses, as more and more energy of the occupying power is spent defending its own hardpoints. Then, once the occupying power has either abandoned the peripheries, or is in a strategically committed, and therefore rigid posture, attack crucial supports, forcing a retreat and a collapse.
The first phase is the trap phase. The idea is to generate lawlessness and risk which requires the regular presence of the occupying power. The less mobile the occupying power becomes, the more it must set up checkpoints, then firebases to man the checkpoints, then patrols to protect the firebases and sweep out insurgents.
The second phase in an area is the strike phase. Attacking the weakest points of presence - checkpoints and distant patrols. The idea is to goad the occupying power into a large sweep operation, putting large numbers of their troops in the field and at risk, outside of defensive and well understood areas, outside of human intel and terrain knowledge.
>>29766776
The third phase is "bleed". The bleed phase is the crucial turning point. Occupying powers can afford wastage at their peripheries for years. What they cannot afford is to have their basic supply lines cut. In Afghanistan the exposed weakness was the need to ferry people through the country by chopper. The insurgenct could then take out high value leadership by covering available chopper routes, striking to require the presence of high value personnel, and then shooting the choppers out of the sky. Losing grunts is a day's work for an army - losing Captains, Majors, Colenels, Doctor's and pilots is not. It takes 16 weeks to make a grunt, it takes years to make a captain or pilot.
>>29766657
Cheers bud and as promised:
(from /k/ own special library)
https://murdercube.com/files/Military%20Science/
(just found this sitting in my bookmarks)
https://louisville.edu/armyrotc/files/Galula%20David%20-%20Counterinsurgency%20Warfare.pdf
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/
(scroll down until you hit "documents")
https://www.scribd.com/search?page=1&content_type=tops&query=counter%20insurgency
>>29766746
>hippy faggot atheist Muslim communist
3/5 not bad. But nah, It's just I've spent three years doing counter insurgency. I knew it was a failure from the start. It's mind boggling trying to justify all my hard work knowing it was for naught. I worked very hard over there, but I'll be the first to tell you I did nothing towards actually ending the insurgency.
>>29766764
>radical islamic insurgents
jihadists are the symptom, islam/culture are the cancer.
>>29766594
>I'm an actual vet and that means I know what I'm talking about.
Bump for last phase (OP?)
Check out Savage Wars of Peace and Invisible Armies both by Max Boot
saved
>>29766816
If you don't mind sharing, what was the general feeling on the ground among troops? Was there any tangible success that you could hold onto and say that it improved the situation on the ground? Tell me if I'm asking too much.
>>29768528
OP here, would like to see last phase as well. Guess anon is at work or something.
Read everything by David Kilcullen. He was counter-insurgency adviser during the surge in Iraq. I've read all his books except the newest one.
Read small wars journal.
Read correlates of war reports.
Watch lectures from institute of world politics, tons on youtube.
The sad fact of writing on the topic of counterinsurgency is that generalizations are not "war winning" strategies. Counterinsurgency relies too heavily on local and regional experts, academics, and personnel who are masters of "win hearts minds".
>>29766623
>ICA
You mean F3EA? Are you a POG?
>>29766918
Kilcullen makes a suggestion that people use the term Takfir when referring to terrorists because Jihadist has a positive connotation in the literature and history of Islam.
By calling these people "holy warriors" you basically call them heroes. If you want them to be viewed as "unholy warriors", heretics, you start referring to them as Takfir. It will catch on in 10 years if we start now.
>>29766918
Nice meme.
FM 3-24
>>29773466
One local (Serbian) analyst wrote a great piece on Taqiyah and it's use from the Israeli-Arab wars (how Arabs basically signed a peace treaty only to break it at their convenience) until today, on all levels of politics. He also mentions that Mohamed also practiced Tagiyah while he was alive. I'm mentioning this because I'm fairly certain that most of the Muslims don't mind what's going on with ISIS and other radical Islamist groups in ME and elsewhere.
>>29775169
>Serbian
>>29775245
Your point being?
>>29766425
>attack from one side and switch to another
No fucking shit, Sherlock.
>The second is the indirect attack, the attack sinister, that the enemy does not expect and which causes him to divide his forces at the last minute, leading to confusion and disaster
"Sire! I am skilled in the arts of strategy and tactics!!"
"Who is this that speaks to me as though I needed his advice?"
>give "murphy's law" time to work
What a great fucking idea. Much profound. So wow.
>>29766128
Do what the Koreans did in Vietnam and if you ever have a single bullet fired at you from a village, you go to that village and mow everyone and everything down. A fish can't swim in water if there's no water. Hearts and minds is a bullshit agenda. Fear provokes a much stronger and faster reaction.
>>29766128
"Walking through walls: Soldiers as architects"
Eyal Weizman, 2005
publicspace.org/en/text-library/eng/b018-walking-through-walls-soldiers-as-architects-in-the-israeli-palestinian-conflict
>>29766623
>When the profits are higher than the cost
You mean when the costs are higher than the profits
>>29775478
Except that also provokes a stronger blowback. Guerrillas can use it as a means of recruitment by warning other civilians that this is the fate that awaits them.
You may as well commit widespread genocide just to be thorough.
>>29766659
You can beat an insurgency by establishing a replacement political order. You just have to pull off the power transition correctly.
Of course, it doesn't mean the country is actually stable. It just means you've dumped the problems onto the new local government.
>>29766128
>>29766700
Do what the Nazis did in the ghettos, and what the Israelis attempt to do today.
Reprisal killings. For every bombing sabotage or assassination, respond with a disproportionate amount of civilian casualties. It turns you into the bad guy, and most of the population will be sympathetic to the militants, however it will also buy time until objectives and ringleaders can be conquered. It can also make the enemy careless with rage and draw them out.
>>29776538
THIS
I re-read this 2-3 times a year.
They were going to turn this paper into a documentary, but I don't think it got further than this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXfV9iWYkDI
>>29766659
>>29766128
the US-Philippine war is a perfect example of how the west can win a guerilla war. Its not politically correct but most of the best things in life aren't.
>>29776714
I thought after the failure of the black and tans in Ireland would turn people away from this stupid strategy.
Reprisal attacks are a lazy and shortminded COIN strategy.
>>29766989
Why was this deleted?
>>29777122
Except that was done under the pretense of expansive colonization where America believed they rightfully won sovereignty of a faraway land from another colonizing power and could afford to treat the colonized population like livestock.
When western powers lost taste for coercive ownership of colonies they also lost a solid justification for persistent scorch earth tactics.
>>29778569
and yet it worked
>>29777122
I'd say that the Malayan Emergency is probably the best handled counterinsurgency by a western nation.
>>29779282
Yes, back then. But the idea of sovereignty has changed a lot the past century. Propagation of fear by a foreign power will only work with minimal consequence when the foreign power has extensive dominion over the other and the target country is unable to reach out internationally. Back in the days of Western expansionism and colonialism this was entirely possible because most of the states they targeted are regionally isolated.
With everything globalized now foreign policies are tangled up by wide-reaching foreign relations, media biases, and every nation claiming sovereignty.
