Operational Security (OPSEC). Important stuff for the Cold War, and even today. PatriotVoices has a great post on the topic, taking us back to another time (at least for us older ones who had to face the “Evil Empire” while wearing a uniform. I concur with that post and vouch for it’s accuracy. The bad guys had incredible intelligence gathering organizations, and even if today’s enemy doesn’t have those resources, they have the web. It’s a great aggregator of info….

While we make our posts, the world reads them. It’s quite satisfying to get a good comment. Good doesn’t mean as in how wonderful a post was (yep, those are nice), but one that adds to the issue, or corrects an error, or critically debates the info, (debate here meaning what the ancient Greeks would recognize as debate, not just a bunch of personal opinions presented with truth). As the posts propagate out via trackbacks and links sent around by others to friends and associates, more information on the topic can be aggregated. In a dedicated intelligence collecting environment, this becomes powerful. By accident it the same thing can happen. This morning I saw this very example. The topic is the physics and chemistry of state changes of water, but it you read the post and comments, you’ll follow my point.

I found the post via the Open Post for 7/8/2005 on Mudville Gazette. Ma Deuce Gunner posted a science question Friday 7/8/2005 @ 6:31PM (I assume that’s sandbox time). At 8:25 PM, Owen had answered the question, with a correction to the actual naming by John of the phenomena by 4:43 AM 7/9. That is some serious application of knowledge in my view.

Think for a moment how a moment of typed pondering of any one of the Milbloggers, regardless of when we served, might have a similar effect? Consider a situation where the comments were not fed back to the author, but to others who could use the description of a tactical concept to their advantage. It’s like the breaking of atomic bonds…it can light up a city, or decimated it. Same principle, different logic behind the application. We know the military is a plodding beaurarcy, and some things don’t change. We also know the basics of warfare haven’t changed from it’s very beginnings, but then many of us have been present when some new tactical or strategic concept came to be. Some us may have been actively involved in the birthing of something that made the organization more militarily effective. Some times, it’s the assemblage of several old, well known concepts that make a new tactical break through. Just before WWI, some german scientists came up with a process to create fertilizer. It was expensive and the process shelved. When WWI came along, and the sea lines of communications were restricted and bird guano, rich in nitrates and used in the production of explosives, as well as being used on the farms was cut off, the process was pulled of the shelf, so explosives could be made…The 1 year supply of natural nitrates in 1914 should have limited Germany’s ability to fight any longer than that. Application of an old idea killed many of the youth of Europe and the US for four years, thanks to modern living thru chemistry.

A few years ago, a couple of math guys speculated the we are all connected to each other by at most, six people, hence the concept of “Six Degrees of Separation.” The business world knows of this and I have a friend who has leveraged off this concept, and while he is a civilian, with military like efficiency. Using a network, intentionally, or unintentionally, yields a large amount of information quickly. Throw in the ability to search the web, once you have been “tipped off” for other knowledge on the subject.

While I was in the Navy, there seemed to be a constant low level battle waged about what had to go into the “burn bag.” Some said all naval messages, regardless of classification, others said only classified ones. Given the massive stack of paper I routinely dealt with in my operations department tours, and having been the communications officer, I thought it far too easy for a classified message (of which many were Confidential, could accidentally end up in a trash can, mixed with the unclassified ones, so I preferred the burn bag for messages. Those who had to store the many red and white striped bags, and those who had to actually take them to the shore based incinerators, disliked that idea. Both sides of the battle had legitimate reasons for their choices.

There are things I have great sea stories about, and some of the things have come out in open source, but I still refrain.

Summary;

It’s a double edged sword out here with information on the web. Be mindful of what you post

Over on one of my favorite blog hangouts, Right Thinking Girl, there was a post rhetorically questioning the response to a nuke going off in the US as part of the WoT. Nothing is rhetorical on RTG, and some threads rage for days. If you’re in the mood for a good debate, head over to see what’s cooking there.

I pondered the point for a moment and then posted my first response. a few of the regulars chimed in on the “gimme
some of that old Hiroshima GLOW” side of the argument. I don’t think a nuke at the shrine would do the right thing. Anyhow, this became the first stage of putting words to something I have been pondering for a few years.

“We are in a world of unknowns. The seemingly tired phrase from Vietnam about “no front lines” was a
simplistic anaology back then, but, as recently London has been a victim of it’s own “upstanding citizens,” we are
in uncharted waters. This war, while “insurgencies” may have existed before, they didn’t have the access to
thermo-nuclear devices from the now defunct Soviet Bloc, which even in their “low yield” capacity can do damage for centuries, let alone anthrax and other “bugs and gas” type stuff, which is nasty, but containable in time and space much easier (from a clinical view, from the victims view, it’s horrific).

When the Evil Empire was a fixed set of geographic points, this enemy, fighting a battle over the territory of the mind (you must accept their ideology), is unlike any war that has been.

Nuking Mecca sure sounds like an immediate gratification, but FTM29 may have a more practical solution…

Bottom line: I think we are, as a human race, so uncompletely prepeared for this type of conflict, even our great thinkers, such as Eliot Cohen (who was the Dean at War College when I attended) is at a loss for how to proceed. Not only is he a brilliant thinker, he has just seen his son, an Army Captain, ship out for the Middle East. He is invested in this war at many levels. Here are his most recent thoughts on the entire matter. Profound to the core of his thoughts and worth your time.

I’m stumped, but then I’m not even a chem light of intensity compared to the smarts of Professor Cohen. This war is being waged and fought in many dimensions of the human experience, and I fear we have not entered all the battlefields. “Winning the hearts and minds” is another Vietnam concept that needs a lot more investigation, but I believe we must go there. I just got my copy of “Our Own Worst Enemy” by William Lederer yesterday ($0.99 plus shipping!) I’m thinking there’s some bits of wisdom in there I need to re-read. H&Ms is not a lame effort, it’s a viable strategy, which the Marines began looking into in the Central American campaigns at the opening of the 1900s. They wrote the Small Wars Manual, which discusses how to interact with the local populace in order to show them you’re there to
help. On the other hand, we were kinda in Central America for the big fruit guys….:( ”

I managed to get away from my desk to do some work, and while I did, it came to me that we have “been here” before, and, in fact, are there now. I returned to RTG’s comment section and then posted this:

“After thinking about this a little more, we are seeing this same model right now: The War on Drugs.

Different “weapons” are being delivered, it used to be a organized crime controlled environment (which had some definable boundaries of the organizations). Then the “cartels” arose, which would be going from the bi-polar power model, to the multi-polar model of powerful entities. So far, so good…manageable in it’s understood environment.

Next came every Tom, Dick, and Harry, who saw there was big profits to be made hopped in as sort of “independent contractors” in a free form economic model. As a result, the defined “enemy” became one on every street corner. They are the jihadi equivalents. Amsterdam may be a comparison for the middle eastern cities that harbor terrorists, and allow them to freely exercise their thoughts in the open.

We have been trying to successfully take this on using the military, law enforcement, border control entities and also public health organizations. So far, we have made headway, but it is an ongoing battle, with no end in sight…

I’m gonna have to think on this some more….just as with the terrorists, it went from country based armies, to just anyone who wants to get in on the act, sanctioned or not, by the control “agency” at the top of the chain of command…and our own citizens wage the war…also with ACLU on their side…mmmmm..interesting cross connect….Not only that, but Europe is a fertile environment for the drug trade as well…another connection.

As far back as 1982, my military assignments had me directly interacting with the drug war. I often thought over all those years how the drug trade seemed to have been a illegal business for much of modern history, but there were the entities such as the Mafia, that did “manage” the trade. I’ll admit, I haven’t taken any dedicated time to study the history of this topic, and my knowledge is essentially exclusively derived from situations where the drug trade interjected itself into the world of military history. I’m striking out here in my limited commentary.

Anyhow, “competition” arose and other big players entered the market. After a while, then many “little people,” as we are inclined to do after an unagreed to apprenticeship, leave the “company” employ, now empowered with sufficient knowledge to start up our own business in the trade. I firmly believe the big guys in the “management” shop lost control It has become a free-for-all market, so, much as like th GWoT, there sure isn’t a central building where the head cheese sits. Which government does Osama work for?

I believe our actions that show people that democracy, or at least that modeled into a look alike to our system, and that the Middle East, and other parts of the globe, will come along, merely because we have something special, that they want, also.

In the same vein, then I added this:

“A study of the manner in which Bismark unified Germany has some good lessons on how to make your enemy your friend. He did it from the position of strength. He was known to let von Moltke “show his stuff,” but only until the point had been made clear. A particular campaign into Denmark is a good case in point and I don’t have access to “On War” right this moment to dig up the one I’m thinking of.

To use a large warhead, or, like if you shoot “one” you’re really sending 10 (it’s a missile design thing) is pretty much an overkill.

While there are not moderate Muslims, there are many, as with Christians and Jewish people who claim the religion, but don’t spend much time really getting to know the faith. I attribute the lack of “moderate Muslim” response due to those who don’t really practice it except for show, then life a pretty regular life otherwise. To nuke a city (and one of our nukes is good enough to do that), would truly risk putting much of the world against us.

Unlike the surrender of the Japanese, where their culture held the Emperor as a god, and therefore to get him to come around was to get the Japanese to stop their aggression, the jihadis are still many splinter group with only the hate of all of the modern world connecting them. No central figure to pressure…”

It’s a thorny issue. I think I have found a proper corollary to the war without borders in the form of the GWoT, without excess hyperbole. Maybe we can look at the two wars in order to help fight each of them to a successful conclusion.

As the ending note, I’ve always bben a cynic when it comes to believing that Congress would ever let the law enforcement and military get serious about winning the war on drugs, for most of them are lawyers, and I know a great deal of defense money is being made for their professional peers, so we’ll just be allowed to play at ending it, but never turned loose to get ‘er done.

And, there you have it. One man’s views. Maybe I’m off the mark, but maybe not.

The entire issue of “FIRE KARL ROVE!!!” seemed to evaporate last night. I’ll tell you, if I was a reasonably smart person in the Democratic Party now, I think I’d have to give my party affiliation a serious moment of thought. More on that later.

Von Clausewitz brought into the lexicon the concept of “centers of gravity” (hereafter a “COG”). Here”s a comment on his definition found here:

Perhaps most important was the idea of focusing one’s military efforts against the enemy’s “center of gravity” (“Schwerpunkt”), which has become an important concept in American doctrine. Clausewitz’s use of this term is problematic, however. He often used it in very general terms to mean something like “the main thing” or “the key point at issue.”

The Democrats are after President Bush. That’s no secret. These past few weeks, they have focused on the COG of Karl Rove. Good move, they have found a “main thing” without a doubt. If they can topple him, I presume the Democrats believe they will see a major degradation of the Republican’s strategic planning. This could work.

If you’re going after a COG, realize the “enemy” will know those pressure points and defend them. Plan a viable strategy to accomplish your mission. This brings up a number of points.

First off, many middle grade and senior officers of the armed forces are sent to the various war colleges around the nation, as well as abroad to learn about von Clausewitz and his concepts of warfare. It sure would be nice to have some of those people in your pocket when you wage any type of war, be it business or political. The Democrats have long viewed military members as people who are not intelligent enough to come to the table, and therefore, they don’t seem to be able to attract “the best and the brightest” when they have to hang up their uniforms. That seriously limits the understanding of planning and executing a strategic plan. Add to this a tendency to see Democratic types spending more time getting to understand domestic and social programs. That would be another strike in the score card, because of the lack of exposure to those types of situations where strategic “war fighting” would be experienced and therefore understood better.

That being said, and back to my earlier comment regarding reviewing your party membership, the Democrats can identify the Republican COGs, but their assaults are virtual banzai attacks. A few months back, while putting Tom Delay in the cross hairs, it appears the Democrats had somehow forgotten to load their weapons with live ammo, and not just paintballs. How embarrassing to stand up and demand someone’s resignation and find out many members of Congress were also not reporting their paid for travel activities per the regulations. Open mouth, insert foot and chew, then repeat. Notice how quiet it got before many Democrats should have been called out to resign?

Same thing just happened with Karl Rove. It seems a journalist made the first move, let alone we find out now Valerie Plame made a point to make sure her neighbors knew about her employment long ago, and that she wasn’t any kind of undercover operative at all. With so many lawyers in Congress, how did they miss checking the “charges” against the “elements of the offense?” I learned that one as a collateral duty legal officer aboard a ship. More paint balls fired, lots of angry voices, but ¦the republican COG is still alive and well. Actually, I think it’s ironic that the defense of the charge was mostly just done by letting the truth that the journalistic organizations, who also show a marked bias against the sitting president caused their own failure.

I say again: It’s tough to fight when you pretty well let people who do know how feel like they are incapable of hanging around with you. Sort of like when the Democrats opened their eyes after last September and proclaimed “We have to find out what these ‘values” are!”

Taking out COGs is a large undertaking, yet it’s rewards are dramatic if you succeed. You have to mount an effective campaign, and match your weapons to the target. Also make sure you know your enemy well. Don’™t go at it half baked.

Associated with this entire issue is one of the extreme hypocrisy of the Democratic party. John Kerry specifically said Karl Rove should go, even if he is found innocent (funny, he wasn’t even charged with any crime). Extend this as though you just got some insight into the strategic thinking of the man who may have become our President. It never works when your main weapon against your enemy is a microphone used liberally at a press conference, to ask you enemy to just dismantle their COG, because you want them to. I’d argue you can demand they destroy the COGs themselves, but only after you have shown them the capabilities of your armed forces. Peace through superior firepower. It’s been proven across history, that negotiations from a position of strength are exceptionally effective. I’d be inclined to believe John Kerry would have considered the power of words to be his most effective weapon, had he made it into the White House. I submit someone with only junior officer service is ill-equipment by the virtues of that alone, to be considered a strategically minded person.

Another extension of this issue is the amount of evidence the Democrats were using to ask a man to end a career. Effectively, they said there didn’t even have to be any evidence at all, that he should just resign. Square this with the fervent calls from the Democrats, led by John Kerry and Hillary Clinton and Harry Reid, for the President to beyond a shadow of a doubt, prove explicitly that there were WMDs and that Saddam Hussien had everything to do with terrorists. Hypocrisy in large neon, flashing lights comes to mind. How can lawyers not get one iota of this disconnect? All they are doing is demonstrating outwardly that they have no plans on how to get anything done.

If they can’t mount an effective assault to regain the Presidency, I submit they are unable to plan any strategy to defend this nation, let alone taking a stab at leadership in any arena. I suspect some Democratic Party members are thinking, for the Democratic party is losing political seats. If the National Democrats march out on any more campaigns against their last two, all they can hope to win is irrelevance.

Thanks, Mudville Gazette!

I’m glad to see Grey Eagle of A Female Soldier back again. I say back, because I was regularly reading the blog of this 35 YO mother who enlisted in the Army because she wanted to do something for her country. I really have to admire a peson that old, an especially someone with plenty of real world considerations to not volunteer,
who just puts up their right hand and then makes sure she’ll be carrying a serious responsibility along in the midst of the fighting. A few months back, my link quit working to her blog. I was afraid she had decided with the upper level scrutiny that she just packed it in rather than register her “place of business.”

She’s back at the link above. This morning, a picture with the caption “Charlie’s Angels” (three female medics assigend to C Company) cuaght my eye. By clicking on each of their names below the picture, you get a one page story about them.

All three are good reads. More real world input to who is making us safe and what they do. The one for Sgt. Angela Magnuson had something very impressive in it in the form of the testimony of a dying man. Not his words, but his actions.

“His name was Spc. James Holmes. But to those who knew him, he was affectionately called “Tugboat” because he was a large man who would pull his load and then some.”

While Sgt Magnuson tried to bandage his wounds from an IED attack, he was pulling more than his fair share, by helping her help him, despite being mortally wounded.

I invite you to take a few minutes and read about one more hero who is no longer here, but sets a fine example for those of us left behind.

Thanks to Mudville Gazette Open Posts!

Sorry for the lack of posts, but…

The Boss is gone, the swamp is full and alligators are plentiful.

Her daughter completed Vet School a few weeks back and is now at her intro to wearing a uniform as a veternarian. It has been rewarding to be able to pass on the gouge about detailers (or as you Army people call them: Career Management Advisors or some PC thing like that…Flesh Peddlers does it for me..), how to see where the “extra” money is hidden in enroute schooling PCS orders, advice on stuff like “you better hit the road and break in those boots, because some sergeant is gonna have a ball yelling at Officers like you soon,” who to talk to to get storage authorized for a longer period than routine for free, etc, etc. You get the point…

I did hose the new Captain over a little: I showed mom the DoD site with pay scales, complete with BAS/BAQ/VHA lists for her PCS area. I also read the PCS orders and showed mom where another $100/month propay will show up on the LES. Thanks to the Race for the Moon, a small calculator quickly did the math and suddenly, the request for a new laptop wasn’t looked upon so kindly, not for someone instantly making O-3 pay with 4 Yrs/0 Months… 🙂

You know, it has been a few conversations like that that have helped smooth out some mis-understandings and complete (not in a bad way) ignorance of the system. I grew up around the military, as the son of a civil servant who liked to travel. Naturally, most places we lived had significant military presense. I was “schooled” from way back, along with becoming a pin cushion at the Sand Point Naval Air Staion clinic at the ripe old age of 7 years old.

Rasing my hand and putting on the uniform didn’t hold a lot of basic mysteries for me. I now live were there are a very small percentage of military people. The kids don’t have too many places to go to get the day to day simple stuff, which has become second nature to vets, even if it was only a 4 year hitch.

Take a moment to help out that new kid heading off to boot camp, or OCS, or ROTC, or the Academies. Give them a few groups on the real stuff that makes a difference in getting in the groove quickly. Gouge is good…be generous with it.

Thanks to Mudville Gazette Open Posts!

Or: What do the terrorists, the Japanese in WWII, cell phones, CAP actions in Vietnam and recent Army recruiting woes have in common…

Point of Pondering #1.

As I sat in traffic today, a few things came to mind that may be the reason we are seeing some shifts in the attack patterns of al-Qaeda this past few months.

I guess the thinking on the topic began with this post over on Chapomatic’s blog. It was a one-liner, which ends with:

“That much effort indicates to me that these guys don’t currently have usable WMD.”

That struck me as not necessarily correct under the circumstances, so I left this comment:

“or…alternatively, they still think they may not be ready to be completely exterminated, after being hunted down like rabid dogs. They may see this “level of violence” can still get them a pass from those who keep saying it’s all illegal. I’d bet even the nay sayers, well, maybe half of them, would come around to GWB’s view and measures as acceptable if a dirty bomb, or bio/chem agents are released…which would put the polls at about 75% saying “kill the bums!” Kind of hard to say there isn’t a “mandate” when your polls are that high…the gloves would come off at that point, and I suspect they know they cannot stand a full court press.

A real, no kidding WMD, complete with destruction of “Biblical proportions,” would most likely shift the World’s opinions completely against them.

(I’m no intel guy, but) The exact opposite of this briefing may not be discounted…. “

These terrible, yet small scale attacks, we have been seeing are noteworthy in that they hits the media like the tsunami last Dec 26th, and get the attention up, yet the outward sentiment of the world still stays latched on the “Bush Lied, People Died” and “Where are the WMDEEEEEEEEESSSSSS???????” themes.

As I noted above, I think the use of a WMD, of any degree, would suddenly cause a reaction they know they can’t afford.

Point of pondering #2:

Until the comment today about how the London bombs appeared to have all been triggered by cell phones, I hadn’t really stopped to think about the fact that this is a common tactic of the terrorists in Iraq right now. The news reports of the military finding a bomb or IED making lab, usually in a house somewhere, contains cell phones in the listing of materials found. One picture I saw a few months back was a soldier’s hand holding a cell phone with the annotation “1 Missed Call” on the phone’s LCD. The phone had wires hanging out of it that weren’t for better reception. They use this triggering tactic regularly.

Why the interest in the cell phones? Well, simple. If you see the masses, or the attendees at the videoed beheadings, there is usually plenty of indication they are willing to die for Allah. We have repeatedly heard, and can find it supported in the Koran, that to die in a declared holy war for Allah will get you admitted to paradise. If that’s the case, we know jihad has been declared in about 4 hundred and eleven different ways against “The Crusaders” (which would literally include England, and never did include the United States of America, as were just hadn’t found the place yet), so why are they not lining up and saying: “Mohammed, put me in! Come on, put me in, just this time, you know I can do it for the team!”

Simple: The use of the cell phones allows them to keep the trained fighters for another day.

It’s all about resource management, which is mostly what a commander in the field does. It’s nice to have a plan, and then gather the logistical support for the execution, but if the bad guys don’t follow your plan, you may come up a little short. In this case, I think there are two dynamics at play here.

Point of pondering #2A.

The first condition is I think the terrorists have seen the opinion tide shifting in their favor. I won’t belabor the world media’s love affair here, but they, as does anyone, gather strength to endure by seeing they and their cause being praised. The problem is, there aren’t enough “resources” (read people willing to blow themselves up to head for paradise), coupled with the fact that the media hasn’t caused the US and it’s collation countries to capitulate. They have to hang on. It’s sort of like the point in many war movies, when the platoon/company is surrounded and the enemy is chomping at the bit to overrun them, and some cigar chomping master sergeant or company commander yells for everyone to conserve ammo and only shoot what you know you can hit. In this case the ammo is a humanized version of the smart bomb (smartness may be debatable, but let’s leave that to another post). I think they are running low. Using cell phones improves the possibility of having more seasoned fighters around for the final push.

Point of pondering 2B.

So, what’s up with that? Well, let’s take a short trip to the near past, like two months ago. What was the almost daily screeching from the papers and HBM about? Yep, you got it: “Army Not meeting Recruiting Goals.” War is a tough business and it’s not just some of the youth of America that sometimes balk at the call. Where are the demanding headlines in the world press, demanding to know what the actual numbers targeted (sorry, but we use that word about our recruiting plans) to get signed up and how many actually did. I want to know if their recruiters are treated to an un-video taped beheading if they fail on a monthly goal. I bet there’s a massive cover-up on this issue amongst the jihadis…

The “recruiting numbers” may be lower (assuming my analysis that they are missing their numbers is correct) based on another reason. In “Our Own Worst Enemy” by William Lederer, the author tells the story of a Marine unit that gets assigned to work security for a Vietnamese village. They model their interaction with the villagers from the guidance of the “Small Wars Manual” the Marines figured out after having served in Central America in the early 1900s. Anyhow, the Marines not only provided protection, they showed the villagers how to farm and grow livestock more effectively, then there is surplus over the families needs, so they form a little co-op and take the surplus to market and then they had extra hard cash to use to then do more and make more. Great story.

This links in with this discussion because, as we have also seen in Iraq, over time, the villagers start “ratting out” the VC, telling the Marines when the attacks are coming. The village bonded with their Marine protectors and mentors. The best part of the story is what I think applies here. The Viet Cong locals would slip back into the village at night. Their friends would tell them all the things the Marines had helped them to learn, and how they actually were improving their farms and making some money. The VC had been promising this type of thing for a long time, but it was the young men of the USMC that delivered on the promise.

As we see Iraq rebuilding itself, with commerce developing, and people being able to speak and interact freely, I’m sure some of the “recruits” are having second thoughts. When we hear stories of al-Qaeda recruiters killing off family members in order to get people to come and join the jihad, I’d say they are pretty well beat. The VC ended up doing that, and that sort of recruiting has an exceptionally low “1st Term Retention” number associated with it…like about 0% in any one’s armed force.

Point of pondering #3.

Maybe the jihadis took some time to look into the whole suicide bomber deal by reading up on another recent example in world history. I am assuming they did some course work in the “Divine Wind” work of the Japanese in WWII. If they studied this well, they would see a few interesting things, not the least of which was JAPAN LOST! (that’s a no cost clue). Another real issue in Japan was that some senior and middle grade officers strongly (well, as strongly as they could) lobbied against the concept, the dissenting side largely being the pilots. Their argument was, if you took enough time to train them to fly (and it was kind of like the 2001 bombers, very little, just enough to get you to the target), then you should use them as a “reusable resource.” Using them once was only going to help so long, then the Chop (supply officer) is saying “sorry, no got!” That’s what happened to the Japanese Navy. By the Battle Off Samar, the Japanese aircraft carriers had pretty much been relegated to being just large targets for the Navy bombers, as they had no pilots to fly from them. They were the decoy to get Bull Halsey to leave the area, while Admiral Kurita went with his surface battleships, cruisers and destroyers to try and spoil MacArthur’s landing at Leyte Gulf.

I think the jihadis have come to understand this lesson: Manage your resources conservatively from the Japanese example.

Summary: I think the boys are on the ropes, but still have the fight in them. I think they are good students of the technical aspects of killing, with some mastery of phsychology and public relations. I think they are very weak historians, as they someone how seem to be repeating many of the mistakes of the past.

Got all that? Clear as mud? Comments?

Thanks to Mudville Gazette for the Open Posts!

Update 11:50PM EDT:

If you’d like a detailed analysis of the London Bombing itself, get your coffee and then click on this link…good stuff from Kung fu Kat…

p>The correlation between the interaction of man with a disease and the US and it’s coalition with the Iraqi “insurgency” have something in common.

Laurie Garrett published her lengthy work, “The Coming Plague” in 1994. While the book is not about malaria, that is one case study she presents to show how we made some poor decisions, which allowed the disease to carry on, even today. In the reading of her well researched book, there are many other parallels between man’s interaction with man that tracks remarkably close to how we have interacted with creatures of far fewer cells and complexity over history. When I read the book years ago, her comments on malaria stuck with me, despite it being a relatively minor portion of the discussion.

In Chapter 2, she discusses how the 1951 World Health Organization “was so optimistic that it declared that Asian malaria could soon reach a stage through careful local management wherein ‘malaria is no longer a problem of major importance.’ The discovery of DDT and other organochlorines, all of which possessed remarkable capacity to kill mosquitoes and other pests on contact…” The insurgency can be looked at in a similar way, that by the application of effective methods and means, the terrorists could be reduced to being “no longer a problem of major importance.” DDT certainly had it’s downside from a public health standpoint, but it did get us out of the starting blocks in the eradication of malaria and killed many mosquitoes.

In 1967, the Surgeon General reported to the President and a gathering of health officials that it was time to close the books on infectious diseases in the US and take on chronic diseases. This then, obviously, would shift the focus away from the eradication of malaria, but it didn’t end the efforts towards that planned move to make it no longer a major problem.

Malaria has plagued the US Military, and of other countries before ours, since the Revolutionary times. In 1947, Congress budgeted $47M to take on the problem of malaria in the 48 continental states. Five years later, funding was stopped, as there hadn’t been any cases of malaria found within the US borders. Other countries around the world still had the problem…Come 1956, a malariologist named Paul Russell of Harvard’s School of Public Health began lobbying for a program to eradicate malaria on a worldwide basis. In a report to Congress, Russell had these words to indicate the degree of commitment required:

”This is a unique moment in the history of man’s attack on one of his oldest and most powerful disease enemies. Failure to proceed energetically might postpone malaria eradication completely.”

With minor changes, this sounds much like the speeches of President Bush, but when he speaks of the terrorist threat. The comparisons in this story are quite striking. Enemies that are not alike. Someone with a vision to know what is not good for society. Lobbying to get the support, and there are many more I’m sure you’re picked up on by now. “Having won World War II, Americans were of a mind to ‘fix things up’: it just seemed fitting and proper in those days that American should use their seemingly unique skills and common sense to mend all the ailments of the planet.”

Funding from Congress came in 1958, but with stipulations of and end to funding by 1963. Why the time frame? Paul Russell’s report indicated that four years of spraying, followed by four years of sure that three consecutive years of no infections were noted. Like all plans, whether for war fighting, or building, or fighting diseases, the “program manager” makes projections based on generally ideal conditions. In the case of the worldwide eradication of malaria, as with dispensing with the threat of terrorism, the campaign must pretty much proceed in parallel everywhere simultaneously, or you’re likely to have the enemy merely slip away to somewhere safe. This does, however, require a high degree of commitment to the plan, as well as a high expense to keep the attack going everywhere. This, of course is much of the discussion today.

As far as ideal planning, the general desire if to get moving as soon as funding flows, but sometimes you have to begin in a piecemeal fashion, which, as with combating malaria and terrorists, can not be very effective. Top that off with a bunch of, for the most part, lawyers who don’t always grasp the technical detail of the plan, and therefore take the Reader’s Digest version and also apply simplistic measures to the plan. In this case, handing out money, then demanding it be done in a few years.

As life and much of history dictates, things change. Along comes a bright graduate student, Andy Speilman, who figured out DDT wasn’t the final answer. What he observed was the Anopheles mosquitoes were dying, but some were resistant to DDT, and still reproducing. A wrench in the gearbox of the plan had just been discovered. Speilman met Rachel Carson, a marine biologist at Woods Hole, and she explained that evolution would get in the middle of the eradication plan.

By 1963, malaria was certainly beat back tremendously, an example being India going from 1 million cases a year in 1955 to 18 by 1963. Congress, checking their notes, realized it was the terminal date of the plan and therefore, committed no more funding to the project. “As far as Congress was concerned, failure to reach eradication by 1963 simply meant it couldn’t be done, in any time frame. And virtually all spare cash was American; without steady infusions of U.S. dollars, the effort died abruptly” says Garrett.

The story continues from there and is fascinating reading, but look at the connections to the current debate about how to handle the GWoT. Once more today, I heard a caller on a talk show bring up the President’s “major hostilities are over” speech on the aircraft carrier. Anyone with any military experience would agree that when artilleymen and tankers are doing foot patrols in the crowded streets of another country, major hostilities are over, otherwise, they’d be rocking the bad guys with the really cool hardware they were trained to use with deadly efficiency. Also, when B-52s no longer fill the skies over the battlefield, it’s a big hint that major operations are concluded. The President was correct. He didn’t say “the war is over and we are victorious.” Had that been the case, it would have been proper to remove a major portion of the deployed military. And, despite that proclamation by the President, as was the case in 1963, the enemy is still around; diminished, but still there.

What lessons are to be extracted from a historical account of how the American leadership took on malaria and the GWoT?

– It’s difficult to judge the exact end of a major plan, regardless of the discipline involved.
– Arbitrary constraints linked to Congressional budget cycles can actually delude you into thinking it’s easy to see the day things will change/end. Oh, if it could just be so simple. On the other hand, the person championing the cause needs to be forthright in indicating the expected “variation” in the timeline. I feel President Bush has been honest about saying this war will be a long and complex one, and he said that early on.
– If you really want to make something “no longer a major problem,” don’t make artificial end dates, instead make milestones with evaluation criteria. At those junctures, see what the state of the plan is and modify your responses accordingly. Make sure the checkbook holders understand this clearly, and get the will of the people to line up with that understanding.
– A form of tactical evolution has happened on the battlefield. We have most likely gotten to the point where we have killed off the weakest of the terrorists, and not are locked in a war with the ones that are resistant to the military tactics applied to date.
– Most times, the weapons you begin the fight with aren’t the ones that will win the conflict Congress is a big group of “bean counters.” I have had life experiences with such people, on a smaller scale, and it was always interesting to see “them” grasping the pennies and not seeing the bigger picture. Sometimes spending a few dollars more today will guarantee you spend far less a few months of years from now. If they can’t let go of the funding to get that done, then you’re pretty much locked in to dealing with it longer.

Regardless of how rosy an initial plan looks, it’s best to evaluate it realistically along the way. Adapt and survive. Don’t declare victory when that’s not the case. Stay the course when your life depends on it.

We have a chance to end the story of the GWoT differently than the one about our war against malaria, which is still with us.