05-30-2012 08:00 AM
The war in Afghanistan has been described as "counterinsurgency", culminating in a "kill list" to be approved by the president, commander in chief of the armed forces. Has counterinsurgency gone too far? Is a kill list beyond the powers of the president?
06-16-2012 08:32 AM
"Counterinsurgency" is "military or political action taken against the activities of guerrillas or revolutionaries."- that's a basic definition. It's eliminating key rebels in order to maintain a stable regime- definitely not "classic warfare" as we know it. It's a term that may have prevented a full-scale or classic warfare in the mideast as we know it, but may also have helped to prolong our presence overseas in the mideast.
PS- If I create an army, then I need someone to fight- the military fuels the war. It's a basic problem with the creation of any military, but I think it's a problem we try to prevent- maybe Vietnam might be good a example, or you might think of others. If you take our current involvement in Afghanistan as an example, some military officers will back "counterinsurgency" with a prolonged presence in Afghanistan if counterinsurgency is to be effective, while others might say "counterinsurgency" is not a strategy to use ever- and so, we need to leave Afghanistan, or change strategies all together, or so forth and so on....