Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sunybcs!rutgers!att!cbnews!military From: Brian Ross (bxr307@coombs.anu.oz) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: Low tech warfare Message-ID: <12150@cbnews.ATT.COM> Date: 9 Dec 89 00:40:52 GMT Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM Lines: 77 Approved: military@att.att.com From: Brian Ross (bxr307@coombs.anu.oz) Its interesting to finally see someone in the US start to recognise the over-reliance of the US military on the use of technology to produce a solution to a military problem. In Vietnam it was obvious that the US Army had a policy of pushing its forces as far into enemy territory as possible. Using them as bait to draw the enemy into combat and then attempting to defeat them with superior firepower. This sort of policy resulted in numerous ambushes and attacks on the US patrols and positions producing very large numbers of US casualties. Usually the Vietnamese were able to make full use of their advantages of surprise and escape before the superior US firepower could be brought to bear on them (admittedly when it did catch them they did suffer similar sorts of casualties). With the result that they usually inflicted far more casaulties than they received. Its interesting to contrast this sort of strategy with that employed by the Australian forces in Vietnam. Whereas the US Army would move in large formations noisily through the bush alerting the Vietnamese to their presence and inviting retaliation. The Australians on the other hand took a different tack and made full use of their experience gained in WWII, Malaya and Borneo fighting against the Japanese and other insurgent movements. We went into the forest and attempted to fight in a similar manner to the enemy and beat them at their own game. The result was that the VC forces in Phuc Thui(?sp) province were unable to operate effectively and by 1969 were no longer considered a significant threat. When this was coupled with a highly effective "hearts and minds" campaign the province was considered so well pacified that it was possible for the Australian task force to be deployed out of the province during the Tet offensive to the north of Saigon. After the end of the offensive they once more returned to their own province and continued to control the area, denying it to the enemy by the use of offensive patrolling until our final withdrawal in 1972. When in the Army here in Australia we were always taught in as to the superiority of these sort of tactics when compared to those employed by the US Army. Which is why we are taught never to have radios blaring on full volume. Always to move extremely quietly and other similar little things which make sure you see the enemy first and kill him before he sees you. By my reading of military history it seems that the US has always sought a technological solution to the problems of war and this is becoming if anything even worse with the new emphasis on the wonders of the silicon revolution. One wonders though what would happen today if the US once more found itself embroiled in another so-called, "low-intensity conflict," like Vietnam. Would any of the lessons learned there about the political-military interface be taken to heart, or would we have another war in which soldiers would be seen saying on TV that, "we had to destroy it to save it"? More scenes of free-fire zones which only serve to alienate the local population and drive them into the insurgent's arms? More "reconnaissance by fire" where its believed if you carpet bomb an area it becomes pacified? Or rather would we see the American soldiers abandoning all their comforts of home, their ice-cream, their rations and clean uniforms being delivered into the field whilst on operations, and instead taking the battle to the enemy on his own terms and trying to win the peoples, "hearts and minds," instead of killing him in the belief that the, "only good commie is a dead one"? I'd be interested to read the responses. _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- | Brian Ross |Snail Mail:- "Bill Bracket the self-made man who came| in a a packet" | Brian Ross ----------------------------------------| Sociology Dept.R.S.S.S. E-Mail Addresses:- bxr307@coombs.anu.oz | Australian National University | CANBERRA,A.C.T.,2601, bxr307@csc.anu.oz | AUSTRALIA | _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-