American Generals admit that Afghani and Iraqi rebels are causing more problems than expected (surprise, surprise).
The rebels don't have very sophisticated weaponry and their numbers are only in the tens of thousands (there are about 140,000 American soldiers on the ground in Iraq alone for example).
But,
1) the rebels have a flat hierarchy, small groups aren't directed centrally, therefore the Americans can't knockout one central command
2) the rebels learn from each other /fast/
For example, if one group figures out how destroy American tanks or aircraft, they tape a "howto" and post it up on the Internet. Also, American soldiers have rules on when they can and can't shoot (rules of engagement) rebels learn these rules and keep each other up-to-date on changes, giving them a good idea on how their enemy will act in any situation.
The rebel's tactics evolve quicker than the American's, and in a meritocratic culture (what works best is used) similar to how open source software evolves.
America has more or less lost the military battle in Iraq (and possibly Southern Afghanistan) and I don't think they have the cultural nous to socially undermine the rebels and regain an advantage.
Although I have no affinity with President Bush et al, America losing Iraq and Afghanistan will mean a very bleak foreseeable future for both countries.
3 comments:
You think if America wins both countries will be better off? How?
I just think that you'll probably have civil war in Iraq, and a situation where the Taliban could take over much of Afghanistan again.
perhaps nobody should win at all. perhaps that'll create better situation.
Post a Comment