|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
From TIME Apr.7, p. 34-35:
"The enemy has gone asymmetric on us. "
I haven't been able to find a definition of this. I think it means that small groups of Iraqis have been able to delay advance of our troops.
Please comment.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 618
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 618 |
Hi Bill,
I think the term is applied to terrorist-type activities. I'm not sure of the technically-correct definition, but asymmetric warfare means that one team has lined up in the traditional man-on-man positions, and the other is playing a zone defence (or offence for that matter).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 6,296 |
Zone defense? Is this a sports thread?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
A Marine Lt.Col. commenting on unexpected Iraqi strategy.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,624
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,624 |
I think it means "not playing by our rules". And certainly they're a little short on air power and cluster bombs, to be sure.
- Pfranz
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
OP
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 13,858 |
But, of course, 250 million vs. 22 million is symmetric.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,624
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,624 |
Natch, Bill. How could you think anything else?
- Pfranz
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,526 |
Asymmetric warfare refers means something other than a large force on a large force. It includes, among other things, urban warfare and terrorism. A few items: First sentence from http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/Parameters/02spring/gray.htm"In American common usage today, asymmetric threats are those that our political, strategic, and military cultures regard as unusual." From http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2001/12/vest.htm""Asymmetric" operations—in which a vast mismatch exists between the resources and philosophies of the combatants, and in which the emphasis is on bypassing an opposing military force and striking directly at cultural, political, or population targets—are a defining characteristic of fourth-generation warfare." k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,624
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,624 |
"In American common usage today, asymmetric threats are those that our political, strategic, and military cultures regard as unusual."
I read this as meaning "all threats since the collapse of the Soviet Union are/have been/always will be asymmetrical". Well, that's okay, because the US/UK militaries are only able to fight second-generation wars anyway. I think we'll see how badly this disadvantages them (or not) over the coming weeks.
The "asymmetry" appears to apply to all levels of conflict, as TFF has said, from diplomatic breakdown down to the post-war reprise, not just armed conflict. Interesting!
- Pfranz
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,317
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
596
guests, and
1
robot. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
