Friday, March 30, 2007

Black Ops. a needed force

I was reading an article by, William M. Arkin, titled, Fighting the "War" Against Terrorists the American Way. In this, Mr. Arkin is discussing a blog he had written on American Super-Secret black ops units on hunter and killer missions.

In the article he commented that he received a vast amount of email asking a really basic question: Is an effort associated so centrally with killing and assassination "American" -- and should it be the assumed future for counter-terrorism?

In a direct quote from the article,

Yesterday, I wrote that U.S. "black" special operations forces in Iraq - Other Coalition Forces - Iraq (OCF-I) under Task Force 88 -- have conducted as many as 300 "takedown" operations, an activity that retired Army Gen. Barry McCaffrey calls "simply magic."

I conceded that McCaffrey has every reason to be impressed with the top secret special operations effort (remember now, this is the clandestine effort, not the "white" world of Green Berets and civil affairs)”

To the writer’s credit he admits his willingness to accept this action if it means the difference between a hot war and a black one.

As an old warrior myself I can tell you that dismantling the enemy’s infrastructure with a hunter killer squad accomplishes more mental devastation against the enemy then standard military action. They simply do not know from one day to the next what is going to happen. They are constantly looking over their shoulder and spend more time staying out of harms way then sending their minions to fight for them.

Of course, the author is posing the question if this is worth it, or actually makes a difference. In my opinion, yes, it is well worth it, for the exact comment I previously made. Yes, black operations is a technique onto itself and as he correctly states, it falls between the cracks of who is authorizing the operations.

One fact remains, to fight and enemy you must fight them from within, very roughly quoted from Sun Tzu, The Art of War,

I do commend the writer for his agreements to black ops, however misguided they may be, they are a required activity in today’s warfare, just as they were thousands of years ago. The military not operating within this covert field will be the losing side.

3 comments:

Icenode said...

Black Ops would be a very good alternative to all out war and I support them. The problem is who gets to make the tricky calls, and where to draw the line. As long as the US and UK care what everyone else thinks, then we are going to keep getting the short end of the stick.

The rest of the world have spoken, and it's evident they don't want to be a part eradicating evil in all forms. I don't blame them, most of them haven't reached a level of importance on a global scale to become a target yet, so why stand up for whats right when it isn't their problem right now.

The way I see it, the US and UK need to either step up and act like the economic and military world powers that they are and to hell with everyone else or we need to get our trops the hell home(all of them). That includes all of troops that have been stationed in many countries and keeping the peace for decades now.

We should see how well the world does without us, even for 30 days.

As an additional bit of fun, we should send a special letter to France containing a bill for their freedom that they are unwilling to protect.

The Daily Rant

The Old Ranter said...

Icenode,
\true wods, my friend. Countries only want to pay lip service, not troops. But, we all know what will happen if and when we do pull out. It will spill over everywhere, then they will be asking why we did.

Good point, step up, or pull out. That is what we are doing, as far as Iran, that is something that has a mind of its own and who knows.

Thanks
Ranter

Roseville Home Appraisal said...

Great posst thanks