19 February 2009

Articles of the Day

I actually saw this topic come up as a thread a little while back on Small Wars Journal, but it's fascinating.  Basically, the latest issue of International Organization included an article which analyzed, in painstaking detail, the effectiveness of mechanized forces in dealing with counterinsurgency vs. that of regular infantry forces.  (You can find the Readers' Digest version at Kings of War, where our very own DeusEx replied.  I'd write a little more on the subject, but it's been a long day.)

Not surprisingly to those of us in 2009, we know that "commuting to war" every day in up-armoured Humvees and returning to base  isn't the way to win insurgencies.  Buttoned up in the hatch of an armoured vehicle or flying above the battlefield in a helicopter shuts off your typical soldier from the subtle nuances of a counter-insurgency environment.  To paraphrase counterinsurgency expert John Nagl, the more secure you make your forces, the less successful you will be.  

In related news, a former US Ambassador penned an article in Foreign Affairs magazine discussing the same sense of risk aversion among the US State Department.  He noted that, since 1983, US embassies have turned into isolated "fortresses", "far from city centers" and are counter to efforts to improve American public diplomacy.  (Gee, you'd think a really awesome person might have written an article on this earlier in Small Wars Journal)  

And the moment you've all been waiting for...  

Your Megan Fox picture:


5 comments:

J. said...

I was going to click on the hyperlinks, but found my hand strangely unwilling to perform the action. Was hypnotized, I think, by that photo.

Good topic though. And of course the US govt response is to buy 2000 more MRAPs from BAE.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

she is super duper sexy hot

Anonymous said...

i want to fuck hher

Primus said...

That's not Megan Fox. The tattoos are off...