-----Original Message-----
From: Bass, Eric 
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 10:04 AM
To: Husser, Shanna; Hull, Bryan; Lenhart, Matthew; Blanchard, Timothy;
Parks, Joe; Martin, Thomas A.; Schwieger, Jim; Winfree, O'Neal D.; Love,
Phillip M.; Weldon, V. Charles
Subject: FW: Civil Discourse Bulletin




> THOUGHT YOU MIGHT ENJOY THIS ONE
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Editor@civildiscourse.com [mailto:Editor@civildiscourse.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 6:49 AM
> To: editor@civildiscourse.com
> Subject: Civil Discourse Bulletin
>
> Recent posting in "Terror's Aftermath" in Public Affairs:
> (The following essay, outlining how long the struggle against terrorism
> might last, has been making the rounds on the Internet. Interestingly, it
is
> being forwarded by both hawks and doves. Perhaps the latter see this as a
> wake-up call, while the former see it as an argument for a more
overwhelming
> response. This was written by Dr. Tony Kern, a retired Air force colonel
and
> an academic advisor at the USAF Academy.)
>
> Like everyone else in this great country, I am reeling from last week's
> attack on our sovereignty. But unlike some, I am not reeling from
surprise.
> As a career soldier and a student and teacher of military history, I have
a
> different perspective, and I think you should hear it.
> This war will be won or lost by the American citizens, not diplomats,
> politicians or soldiers. Let me briefly explain. In spite of what the
media
> and even our own government is telling us, this act was not committed by a
> group of mentally deranged fanatics. To dismiss them as such would be
among
> the gravest of mistakes. This attack was committed by a ferocious,
> intelligent and dedicated adversary. Don't take this the wrong way. I
don't
> admire these men and I deplore their tactics, but I respect their
> capabilities.
> The many parallels that have been made with the Japanese attack on Pearl
> Harbor are apropos. Not only because it was a brilliant sneak attack
against
> a complacent America, but also because we may well be pulling our new
> adversaries out of caves 30 years after we think this war is over, just
like
> my father's generation had to do with the formidable Japanese in the years
> following WW II. These men hate the United States with all of their being,
> and we must not underestimate the power of their moral commitment.
> Napoleon, perhaps the world's greatest combination of soldier and
statesman,
> stated "the moral is to the physical as three is to one." Patton thought
the
> Frenchman underestimated its importance and said moral conviction was five
> times more important in battle than physical strength. Our enemies are
> willing-better said, anxious-to give their lives for their cause. How
> committed are we, America? And for how long?
> In addition to demonstrating great moral conviction, the recent attack
> demonstrated a mastery of some of the basic fundamentals of warfare taught
> to most military officers worldwide, namely simplicity, security and
> surprise. When I first heard rumors that some of these men may have been
> trained at our own Air War College, it made perfect sense to me. This was
> not a random act of violence, and we can expect the same sort of military
> competence to be displayed in the battle to come. This war will escalate,
> with a good portion of it happening right here in the good ole' U.S. of A.
> These men will not go easily into the night. They do not fear us. We must
> not fear them.
> In spite of our overwhelming conventional strength as the world's only
> "superpower" (a truly silly term), we are the underdog in this fight. As
you
> listen to the carefully scripted rhetoric designed to prepare us for the
> march for war, please realize that America is not equipped or seriously
> trained for the battle ahead. To be certain, our soldiers are much better
> than the enemy, and we have some excellent "counter-terrorist"
> organizations, but they are mostly trained for hostage rescues, airfield
> seizures, or the occasional "body snatch," (which may come in handy). We
> will be fighting a war of annihilation, because if their early efforts are
> any indication, our enemy is ready and willing to die to the last man.
> Eradicating the enemy will be costly and time consuming. They have already
> deployed their forces in as many as 20 countries, and are likely living
the
> lives of everyday citizens. Simply put, our soldiers will be tasked with a
> search and destroy mission on multiple foreign landscapes, and the public
> must be patient and supportive until the strategy and tactics can be
worked
> out.
> For the most part, our military is still in the process of redefining
itself
> and is presided over by men and women who grew up with-and were promoted
> because they excelled in-Cold War doctrine, strategy and tactics. This
will
> not be linear warfare, and there will be no clear "centers of gravity" to
> strike with high technology weapons. Our vast technological edge will
> certainly be helpful, but it will not be decisive. Perhaps the perfect
> metaphor for the coming battle was introduced by the terrorists themselves
> aboard the hijacked aircraft-this will be a knife fight, and it will be
won
> or lost by the ingenuity and will of citizens and soldiers, not by
software
> or smart bombs.
> We must also be patient with our military leaders. Unlike Americans who
are
> eager to put this messy time behind us, our adversaries have time on their
> side, and they will use it. They plan to fight a battle of attrition,
hoping
> to drag the battle out until the American public loses its will to fight.
> This might be difficult to believe in this euphoric time of flag waving
and
> patriotism, but it is generally acknowledged that America lacks the
stomach
> for a long fight. We need only look as far back as Vietnam, when North
> Vietnamese General Vo Nguyen Giap (also a military history teacher)
defeated
> the United States of America without ever winning a major tactical battle.
> American soldiers who marched to war cheered on by flag-waving Americans
in
> 1965 were reviled and spat upon less than three years later when they
> returned. Although we hope that Usama Bin Laden is no Giap, he is certain
to
> understand and employ the concept.
> We can expect not only large doses of pain like the recent attacks, but
also
> less audacious "sand in the gears" tactics, ranging from livestock
> infestations to attacks on water supplies and power distribution
facilities.
> These attacks are designed to hit us in our "comfort zone," forcing the
> average American to "pay more and play less" and eventually erode his
> resolve.
> But it can only work if we let it. It is clear to me that the will of the
> American citizenry-you and I-is the center of gravity the enemy has
> targeted. It will be the fulcrum upon which victory or defeat will turn.
He
> believes us to be soft, impatient, and self-centered. He may be right, but
> if so, we must change.
> The Prussian general Carl von Clausewitz, (the most often quoted and least
> read military theorist in history), says that there is a "remarkable
trinity
> of war" that is composed of the (1) will of the people, (2) the political
> leadership of the government, and (3) the chance and probability that
plays
> out on the field of battle, in that order. Every American citizen was in
the
> crosshairs of last Tuesday's attack, not just those that were unfortunate
> enough to be in the World Trade Center or Pentagon. The will of the
American
> people will decide this war. If we are to win, it will be because we have
> what it takes to persevere through a few more hits, learn from our
mistakes,
> improvise, and adapt. If we can do that, we will eventually prevail.
> Everyone I've talked to in the past few days has shared a common
> frustration, saying in one form or another "I just wish I could do
> something!" You are already doing it. Just keep faith in America, and
> continue to support your president and military, and the outcome is
certain.
> If we fail to do so, the outcome is equally certain. God Bless America.
> (Post your thoughts on this or any topic via this bulletin, or visit the
> site at http://www.civildiscourse.com)
>
> THE DAILY GROANER RETURNS! -- 9/25/01
> China sent an envoy to tell the president the US needn't worry about any
> documents lost in the Pentagon blast. The People's Republic has copies of
> everything.
>
>
> Please return this email to file a question or suggestion, change your
> bulletin schedule, or cancel the bulletin. To go directly to the website,
> click http://www.civildiscourse.com
>