FM 17-76
"Yes, we must, indeed, all hang together,
or most assuredly we shall all hang separately
--Benjamin Franklin
I'm glad it's your birthday
Happy birthday to you
--Happy Birthday, The Beatles
_____________
or most assuredly we shall all hang separately
--Benjamin Franklin
I'm glad it's your birthday
Happy birthday to you
--Happy Birthday, The Beatles
_____________
The Declaration of Independence placed the colonies in a state of rebellion against the lawful authority of Great Britain (pre-Coalition needs, mind.) 13 colonies in open insurrection, bearing arms against their government, utilizing militias integrated into the Continental Army for the purpose of evicting British forces from our Baby Homeland.
One of the most notable features of the Declaration is the principle of the people's right to denounce and overthrow their leaders should they fail to respect the people's laws and traditions. If true for Americans, why not true for Afghans and Iraqis?
Those peoples are not trying to overthrow their leaders, but rather to evict U.S. combat presence and the flunkies we have installed from their borders. This is the basis of sovereignty and democratic principle. Democracy is not imposed by foreign armies of occupation and Vichy - Quisling governments.
From FM 3-24 (p. D 4): [D 15] -- "Insurgents may be prosecuted legally as criminals for bearing arms against the government." Also, (p. 1-1): [1-4] -- "Long-term success in COIN depends on the people taking charge of their own affairs and consenting to the government's rule. Achieving this condition requires the government to eliminate as many causes of the insurgency as feasible. This can include eliminating those extremists whose beliefs prevent them from ever reconciling with the government." Hit man, anyone?
Basis of COIN operations in Iraq and Afghanistan: kill anyone opposing U.S. interests. Contrast this with the American Revolution, which was not a war of annihilation; Tories were allowed to leave or integrate into society. The new COIN FM is espousing a fascistic approach, one not in line with enlightened democratic thinking.
If this COIN manual were written in 1776, British Commanders would be authorized to kill rebels with impunity.
This was a revolutionary war utilizing unconventional tactics and guerrilla-type warfare. The colonists were guerrillas before guerrillas were cool. Luckily for us, our founding fathers today are revered as heroes and shining beacons of freedom and liberty.
When the USA was a little dog we were rebels; now that we are big dogs we spend a great deal of our national budget to kill rebels, and these rebels are not even in revolt against the U.S. Fighting rebels in our Civil War was one matter, but fighting other country's rebels seems ill-conceived.
In the past our sympathy lay with the rebels. In 1898, U.S. policy led us to war with Spain brought on by its support of Cuban rebels. In 1903 Columbian rebels were recruited and actually stole Panama from Columbia. The U.S. supported those insurgents because they benefited our policies.
In WWI, the U.S. supported the Arab insurgency versus the Ottoman empire. While it was a declared war, the Arabs were not a nation, and fought an unconventional, guerrilla war.
FM 3-24 espouses reactionary, fascist behavior, invalidating our national experience by de facto defining our Founders as insurgent criminals and betraying our roots.
In 2008 we are now the British Army, and FM 3-24 indicts our founders as "illegal combatants," or one may even say, "illegal enemy combatants" (sacrebleu!) Ask any non-lapdog Brit today.
Labels: 4th of july, consequences of wot, declaration of independence, FM 3-24, phony war on terror, PWOT
7 Comments:
while the continental army under washington, and the southern branch under green were armies in the sense of the word and the time, sam adams and the "sons of liberty" with their tarring and featherings, drowning in boiling tea, and other acts of vandalism and terror would certainly be "terrorists." ethan allen's ragtag bunch of frontier hooligans would also be viewed as worse than al-qaeda. i would imagine that george rogers would get some flak for his activities on the frontier.
yup, elltee, it sure feels like we're the fucking hessians this time doesn't it?
MB, My friend Rob Valentine used to say about Terrorism and the definition of-----it depends whose ox is being gored.
A glorious 4th to you and all Patriots. jim
One thing I'd note is that the American "Revolution" (actually, war of secession) was primarily fought and won by conventional military forces. This was due to the limitations of the available weaponry of the day, which pretty much required mass fire at fairly short ranges in order to do significant damage. Militias contributed very little to the war effort other than as area denial forces to make it difficult for British foraging parties to operate and snipers to take out British leaders. (I've talked about this before, if you're interested in more info about the weaponry of the day and how it forced certain tactics).
That said, the "Sons of Liberty", a terrorist group if ever there was one, definitely was important at suppressing the 33% of the populace that wanted to remain part of Great Britain, and while the militia were for the most part militarily insignificant, from a logistics point of view they did significantly impair the ability of the British generals to accumulate sufficient supplies to conduct operations in the field. But still, this was a war won by exhausting the financial ability of the English crown to field conventional forces to take on conventional forces, not a war won by guerilla action. The weaponry of the day simply would not support such a thing.
- Badtux the MilHistory Penguin
Ahh, Jim, ya had to inject the Bobby Valentine factor into the equation... I'm disappointed in ya, Bro...! Yer taking after Shrub...! ;-)
Aloha, Lisa, Happy Fourth! At least it is still here in the Isles...~! ;-)
ranger: Very spot on. Would like to see a point by point critique of FM 3-24 posted over at Abu Muqawama wich is read by a lot of folks in position. Maybe also Intel Dump, wich is a central Obama-supporting blog.
fnord, fm3-24 is so bullshit that it's embarrassing even commenting on the contents.it's such a wimp document that it really lacks substance-it's so full of qualifiers so as to be useless. jim
One thing to always keep in mind is that the final definitions of "terrorist," "insurgent," and all of the rest are dependent on who won. Victors write the histories. We have statues honoring "terrorists" and "insurgents" all over this country.
Sure, we're the Redcoats or the Hessians now, but that's not necessarily inconsistent with the tides of history. We're now the big, badass cynical power, which means we almost inevitably default to supporting the "establishment" in any given conflict, no matter the rightness of the grievances of the groups seeking to upset the applecart. That's one of the things a lot of us don't like about our nation now: we're old and jaded; the revolutionary spirit is gone.
Ranger, it's late and I'm old and tired. What I'd really like to explore in depth at a later date are my thoughts that this new FM along with the concomitant focus on COIN really pretty much foretell the demise of the Army we've known for lo these many years. It's my bet that we're going to see a radically different Army in the coming years, with the pace of change depending on the quality of political leaders.
Hint: It's all about money. And reality.
Post a Comment
<< Home