- Joined
- Feb 2, 2008
- Messages
- 3,059
Link at the bottom.
I believe that Gen Mattis has this exactly right. What we should have learned is that virtually no one in the world is prepared or equipped to challenge us in a conventional fight. the bright lights of the 1990's spent a lot of time talking about how we would leverage our overwhelming techincal advantages and wage asymetric warfare without considering that the sword was two edged and our vulnerability was at the very low end of the spectrum. Interestingly when I was in Newport in 1995/96 Ralph Peters came to the NWC and talked about his vision of the warfare of the future being much dirtier and more akin to gang warfare than the problems of the Fulda gap and winning the war for the Atlantic that dominated the force development of the Cold War. Sadly- the Netcentric war folks had a sexier message- Technology would win the day. After 7 years of low end conflict - Gen Mattis prediction should be pretty undeniable. The real question that should be asked is : where does the F22 and the next generation of warships fit into this likely scenario?
"The military must make combating irregular warfare a “core competency,” one top American commander told a Senate panel on Tuesday, while another warned Washington’s relations with Russia will remain prickly for some time.
In testimony prepared for the Senate Armed Services Committee, Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis, U.S. Joint Forces Command chief, said American “forces must develop a mastery of the irregular fight on par with our conventional and nuclear capabilities.”
Echoing Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Mattis told the panel “our forces must be flexible and adaptable enough to operate across the spectrum of conflict — this is not an either/or proposition.”
Mattis wants Pentagon officials to build into the general force irregular warfare expertise that “makes them adaptable to however the enemy chooses to fight.”
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/03/defense_mattis_irregular_032409/
I believe that Gen Mattis has this exactly right. What we should have learned is that virtually no one in the world is prepared or equipped to challenge us in a conventional fight. the bright lights of the 1990's spent a lot of time talking about how we would leverage our overwhelming techincal advantages and wage asymetric warfare without considering that the sword was two edged and our vulnerability was at the very low end of the spectrum. Interestingly when I was in Newport in 1995/96 Ralph Peters came to the NWC and talked about his vision of the warfare of the future being much dirtier and more akin to gang warfare than the problems of the Fulda gap and winning the war for the Atlantic that dominated the force development of the Cold War. Sadly- the Netcentric war folks had a sexier message- Technology would win the day. After 7 years of low end conflict - Gen Mattis prediction should be pretty undeniable. The real question that should be asked is : where does the F22 and the next generation of warships fit into this likely scenario?
"The military must make combating irregular warfare a “core competency,” one top American commander told a Senate panel on Tuesday, while another warned Washington’s relations with Russia will remain prickly for some time.
In testimony prepared for the Senate Armed Services Committee, Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis, U.S. Joint Forces Command chief, said American “forces must develop a mastery of the irregular fight on par with our conventional and nuclear capabilities.”
Echoing Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Mattis told the panel “our forces must be flexible and adaptable enough to operate across the spectrum of conflict — this is not an either/or proposition.”
Mattis wants Pentagon officials to build into the general force irregular warfare expertise that “makes them adaptable to however the enemy chooses to fight.”
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/03/defense_mattis_irregular_032409/