0
0
0
From "Small Wars"
http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/the-islamic-state-and-the-%E2%80%9Carmy-in-being%E2%80%9D
The Islamic State, and the “Army in Being”
President Obama’s strategy for containing and eventually destroying the self-proclaimed Islamic State in Iraq and Syria calls for a slow but constant blend of political, economic, and military pressure on the jihadist entity over the course of years. It resembles General Winfield Scott’s proposed Anaconda Strategy at the beginning of the American Civil War. Scott’s plan was logical, but involved a long war; however, in the American fashion, there was pressure to end the war quickly by taking the Confederacy’s capital at Richmond, or for a war winning great battle. Consequently, Americans on both sides got an unwanted long war anyway. General Lee kept the Confederacy alive for four years by maintaining an “army in being”; he knew that the north could not win while the Army of Northern Virginia remained in the field. Ironically, although Lee lost due to Grant’s eventual strategy of annihilation, Abu Bakr al Baghdadi and his caliphate have a much better chance of winning with an army in being than did Lee. However, equally ironically, we have an excellent chance of destroying the Islamic State quickly by using Grant’s strategy which was finally adopted two years late; but we must do it soon and quickly with an overwhelming combination of air and ground force. If there is no army, the caliphate dies.
[EDITORIAL COMMENT:- A+ for 'Goals' - F for 'Plans']
http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/the-islamic-state-and-the-%E2%80%9Carmy-in-being%E2%80%9D
The Islamic State, and the “Army in Being”
President Obama’s strategy for containing and eventually destroying the self-proclaimed Islamic State in Iraq and Syria calls for a slow but constant blend of political, economic, and military pressure on the jihadist entity over the course of years. It resembles General Winfield Scott’s proposed Anaconda Strategy at the beginning of the American Civil War. Scott’s plan was logical, but involved a long war; however, in the American fashion, there was pressure to end the war quickly by taking the Confederacy’s capital at Richmond, or for a war winning great battle. Consequently, Americans on both sides got an unwanted long war anyway. General Lee kept the Confederacy alive for four years by maintaining an “army in being”; he knew that the north could not win while the Army of Northern Virginia remained in the field. Ironically, although Lee lost due to Grant’s eventual strategy of annihilation, Abu Bakr al Baghdadi and his caliphate have a much better chance of winning with an army in being than did Lee. However, equally ironically, we have an excellent chance of destroying the Islamic State quickly by using Grant’s strategy which was finally adopted two years late; but we must do it soon and quickly with an overwhelming combination of air and ground force. If there is no army, the caliphate dies.
[EDITORIAL COMMENT:- A+ for 'Goals' - F for 'Plans']
ISIS
Terrorism
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 1
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google