I'm sure the military folks on the list can suggest better sources. Arreguin-Toft, Ivan. "How the Weak Win Wars: A Theory of Asymmetric Warfare." International Security, vol. 26, no. 1, Summer 2001, pp. 93-128. Paul, T. V. Asymmetric Conflicts: War Initiation by Weaker Powers. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 1994. Miles, Franklin B. Asymmetrical Warfare: An Historical Perspective. Carlisle Barracks, PA: Army War College, 1999. See generally http://www.comw.org/rma/fulltext/asymmetric.html Lee At 5:25 PM -0400 10/4/05, David Farber wrote:

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Robert C. Atkinson" <rca53@columbia.edu> Date: October 4, 2005 4:32:01 PM EDT To: dave@farber.net Subject: Re: [IP] USG RFI for "metrics" on the 'terror war'

Regarding the statement that:

...

the continuing belief that a conventional high- tech army can defeat a low-tech insurgency (something that has not happened in Western history to my knowledge)...

Things aren't quite that bad: there have been "successes" such as

- the British and then US "pacification" of North America (the United States and Canada) and the whole western hemisphere for that matter) - the British "pacification" of South Africa, Australia and New Zealand - the United States in the Philippine Insurrection at turn of the 20th century - British suppression of insurgents in Malaya after WWII? - British suppression of the Mau Mau in Kenya in the 1950s - British suppression of the IRA in Northern Ireland

And in "Western history" Rome's high tech army (for its time) defeated insurgencies throughout the centuries of the Roman Empire. There are probably plenty of other examples that historians can offer. In this day and age, the important thing is to understand why high tech armies sometimes lose to low-tech insurgencies? My guess is that the willingness of the high-tech army's "homefront" to sustain the cost and horror of a long, drawn-out counter- insurgency (including periodic tactical defeats such as Tet in the Vietnam) is a very important factor in the longterm success or failure of the high-tech army. Thanks

Bob

David Farber wrote:

...

Begin forwarded message:

From: Richard Forno <rforno@infowarrior.org> Date: October 4, 2005 2:45:23 PM EDT To: Infowarrior List <infowarrior@g2-forward.org> Cc: Dave Farber <dave@farber.net> Subject: USG RFI for "metrics" on the 'terror war'

While I'm all for knowing how to measure one's effectiveness, I fear that such "metrics" will be nothing more than a rehash of Vietnam-era body count tallies as the "measure of success" in the 'war' to make juicy and positive-sounding quotes for the current iteration of the Five O'Clock Follies.

This, coupled with the continuing belief that a conventional high- tech army can defeat a low-tech insurgency (something that has not happened in Western history to my knowledge) only reinforces my sense that the USG is not learning from history but rather repeating it.

The fact that a contractor is being asked to develop these "metrics" speaks volumes, IMHO. You'd think this would be something they'd have come up with BEFORE launching into the 'war' on terror, right?

-rick

<snip>

...

The Contractor shall develop, in conjunction with the Joint Staff, OSD, Combatant and Unified Commands, Services and designated Agencies (stakeholders) a system of metrics to accurately assess US progress in the War on Terrorism, identify critical issues hindering progress and develop and track action plans to resolve the issues identified. In this effort, the contractor shall work as an independent contractor not subject to the supervision and control of the Government. All deliverables become the property of the US Government.

Source document: http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/files/ WarOnTerrorismMetrics.doc

------------------------------------- You are subscribed as rca53@columbia.edu To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/ interesting-people/

------------------------------------- You are subscribed as tien@well.sf.ca.us To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting- people/

------------------------------------- You are subscribed as eugen@leitl.org To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]