Posted on Nov 14, 2015
Capt Richard I P.
17.7K
52
19
7
7
0
64b52067
C91ff68d
A570dc26
The last time there was truly a Caliphate its expansion was broken by the French under Charles (the Hammer) Martel. DAESH styles itself a Caliphate, attacking a historical enemy certainly seems to make propaganda sense, particularly if it can stimulate continued warfare to serve either apocalyptic or destabilizing ends. The violent benefit from violence.

What is your assessment as a military professional? What do you think of the tactical execution? The operational choices? The strategy? To defeat an enemy we must know them better. And believe this: if you remain a military professional you will fight someone connected to this ideology eventually.

This connects to an earlier post from the Charlie Hebdo attacks seeking to stimulate discussion about the operational purpose of those attacks, and to several others here that I encourage further review of.
https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/what-is-the-operational-purpose-behind-the-charlie-hebdo-paris-attacks

And one asking what people expected France to do in the wake of those attacks, which is directly connected to this one.
https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/how-will-france-react-to-the-attack-on-charlie-hebdo-magazine
Posted in these groups: France ParisSafe image.php TerrorismStrategy globe 1cfii4y StrategyIsis logo ISIS
Edited >1 y ago
Avatar feed
See Results
Responses: 7
CSM Michael J. Uhlig
6
6
0
67847ae0
(6)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
MAJ Alvin B.
4
4
0
(4)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
CPT Jack Durish
3
3
0
Okay, let's get the assumptions out of the way. We're assuming that the latest attack was carried out by one of the radical arms of Islam, most likely ISIS or one such. We're thus assuming that this was not just a criminal act perpetrated by, well, criminals, nor was it an attack by guns and grenades either floating unattended around Paris or having welded themselves into the hands of innocent bystanders.

Stupid? Yes, but don't expect any "hammer". Smart? Maybe. Clever? More likely. Lucky? We'll have to wait and see if they "win" anything. If they do (for example, obtain concessions) then, yes, very lucky.

Ultimately, I must admit that this one beggars my imagination. I am beyond figuring out what the hell they want or wish. Honestly, I'm glad I can't think of it. I might be ashamed of myself if I could.
(3)
Comment
(0)
PV2 Scott Goodpasture
PV2 Scott Goodpasture
>1 y
well we know one of them for sure was a Syrian Refugee. Obviously letting these people was a huge mistake. You can go all bleeding heart if you want to but you would be a fool. These people mean us and freedom loving people everywhere harm. Call me a racist I don't give a crap any more these Muslim bastards want death so much I say give it to them in droves
(0)
Reply
(0)
PV2 Scott Goodpasture
PV2 Scott Goodpasture
>1 y
Capt Richard I P. - anyone could win a fight armed with an AK when the opponent is unarmed. These thugs are blood thirsty murderers not soldiers. it's past time to crush them
(0)
Reply
(0)
Capt Richard I P.
Capt Richard I P.
>1 y
PV2 Scott Goodpasture be cautious not to commit one of the cardinal errors of the warrior: do not underestimate your enemy. Hold them in contempt if you will, but assess their capabilities as accurately as you can, understand them as well as you can, think as much like them as you can. This is the only way to defeat them.
(2)
Reply
(0)
1LT William Clardy
1LT William Clardy
>1 y
Very sage advice, Capt Richard I P..

I would add that it is a mistake to label the attackers as cowards -- they went into the attack with a near-zero expectation of seeing the next sunrise. Courageous but morally despicable enemies are not to be underestimated.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close