|
 |
Thursday, March 20, 2003 |
 It's clear the decapitation strikes are and will be the way that we will win the peace. We are not at war, nor should we be, with the Iraqi people. We are in opposition to Saddam and his terrorist administration. In this sense, we should act like a doctor that acts according to the Hippocratic oath: do no harm. Democracy and Capitalism have won. It is the end of history. We should only excise cancer that saves the patient. We are all dependent.
5:26:05 PM 
|
|
Inside VC is rocking and rolling with its coverage of the war.
5:12:54 PM
|
|
Excellent! It looks like Bush stumbled into the right military strategy: decapitation strikes. The simple fact of the matter is that our technology -- 1) very percise munitions, 2) satellite recon, and 3) electronic surveillance -- can enable low cost, but highly effective, strikes against the leadership of Iraq (and any other rogue state). I had advocated this strategy back in 2001 on this weblog, but it looked like the administration had gone in the opposite direction towards a massive invasion. The delay we see in the roll-out of the war plan proves that we are shifting our strategy to decapitation. Also: Saddam may be dead.
Here is why these operations work:
- We can hit, with precision a variety of targets in real-time. Our intel is developed in real-time.
- The regimes we are targetting are extremely top heavy -- they typically rely on a single "maximimum" leader. Elimination of that leader could end the war quickly.
- There is no real ability of these nations to hit back with overwhelming force (this was a blind spot in our planning process generated by our conflict with the USSR. Decapitation strikes against the USSR would have made it more likely that the USSR would launch nukes, therefore we developed an aversion to using this strategy. That persisted until today. It is now a major part of the US strategy in Iraq. In fact, it is dominant strategy.).
4:46:03 PM
|
|
© Copyright 2003 John Robb.
|
|
|
