Shocking new report: Bombing people causes people to hate you
You better sit down for this one because it will blow your mind.
You are probably aware that we on a global quest to rid the world of Evil, one smart-bomb at a time. Yet, for some strange reason, every place that we bomb Evil into oblivion seems to become more messed up than before.
You would think that our humanitarian mass killing would make the world a better place, but for some reason it never seems to happen.
Now there is a new report that examines this strange trend.
Our new article, forthcoming in the journal Terrorism and Political Violence, examines the coalition’s use of violence to suppress insurgency during the Iraq War. We found that excess reliance on military force can produce counterintuitive results.
Counterintuitive? You mean like, they throw bullets at us instead of flowers?
Using data from the Iraq War Logs, we analyzed the numbers to see whether killing insurgents had any influence on the incidence of insurgent attacks. We constructed a weekly data set across 103 districts in Iraq from 2004 to 2009. The data counted how many insurgents coalition forces killed each week in each district, through all types of military engagement (including direct and indirect fire incidents, bombings or any other form of engagement where a member of the coalition was present to record the incident). We then analyzed whether the number of insurgents killed in a given week had an impact on the number of insurgent attacks against coalition forces in future weeks. The answer is yes — but it turns out that rather than reducing the insugency’s capabilities, killing fighters actually encouraged more attacks against the coalition.
When coalition forces employed extreme violence — killing relatively large numbers of insurgents — they were able to moderate the rate of increase in insurgent attacks, but not reduce it. In other words, military force alone was not successful at decreasing violence in Iraq. Here are four reasons why.
Shocking! Killing lots of people does not create peace on Earth!
But every Hollywood movie based on a video game I've ever seen has an entirely different message (i.e. you kill all the bad guys to win the game). Could all those movies be wrong?
Almost every presidential candidate echoes the message of those Hollywood movies as well. Surely they can't all be wrong!
So what reasons does this report give for such bizarre conclusions?
1) Military force often means collateral damage.
It seems that classifying dead civilians as insurgents/terrorists may work with the American audience, but it doesn't work so well with the locals.
What's more, blowing up their homes and infrastructure doesn't makes them love you either.
2) Civilians are likely to blame outsiders for violence, not the Islamic State.
Funny how the locals are more likely to blame people from the other side of the planet that drop bombs from 30,000 feet, rather than people they can actually see and talk to.
3) Attacking insurgents may actually strengthen their ranks.
Killing insurgent fighters is a sure way to encourage retaliation. If a group can signal strength through retaliatory attacks despite receiving heavy casualties, then local populations are more likely to view that group as strong. Some populations would see backing a strong group as the best way to protect their own interests.
There's also something else the report didn't note: insurgents are people to (believe it or not), and people tend to have families and friends who may resent you killing them.
4) A stronger insurgency is likely to result in more attacks on coalition forces.
So if we can't bomb our way to peace, what can we do?
So far the answer is to bomb even more. It's a message that sells with both Democrats and Republicans.
Now assuming that more bombs aren't the answer (and that MUCH more bombs aren't the answer either), what could be the answer? Well, someone might have an idea.
We have a military plan to defeat the Islamic State – and, as initial gains in Fallujah last week demonstrated, it’s going well in many respects – but we have yet to articulate a political plan to ensure Iraq’s long-term stability.
Sometimes it’s impossible to tell whether it’s 2007 or 2016. The battle plans I hear from our commanders in Iraq today are the same ones I heard at the beginning of the surge, down to the same cities and tribal alliances. My question is: How will this time be different? The silence is deafening.
Oh yeah. The politics. Diplomacy. Long-term thinking rather than short-term explosions.
All stuff that Americans had long ago sh*t-canned as signs of weakness.
Maybe instead of just spending billions on contracting out our military, maybe we can spend a few bucks contracting out our diplomacy too? Because obviously no one in Washington is interested in talking anymore.
Carl von Clausewitz taught us nearly 200 years ago that “War is a mere continuation of politics by other means.” We have to have a political endgame, or the sacrifices our troops continue to make will be in vain. It’s not the military’s job to develop that political plan – that’s where the administration comes in – but it’s painfully clear there isn’t one. Without a long-term political strategy, we can expect to send young Americans back to Iraq every time Iraqi politics fall apart, a new terrorist group sweeps in and we find ourselves required to clean up the mess.
Fixing Iraqi politics is difficult, but I’d much prefer having a heavy, long-term diplomatic presence than losing more lives refighting battles we already won.
The good news is that we are getting very good at invading the Middle East. It'll come in useful again very soon.
Comments
Knock me over with a feather. This is just shocking.
(snark, in case it's lost in text media)
I'm shocked!
Shocked I tell you!
(I couldn't help myself)
I want a Pony!
shocked
There's gambling going on in this establishment!
(here are your winnings, sir!)
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Can't beat the video
It's funny how violence works.
My little brother got beat up by a group of bullies at school. You'd think that would turn me into a bully-loving pacifist. Instead, I hunted down the bullies and beat them up. I guess I'm weird.
That's how it worked in my family.
You bully my family, neighbours or friends, no matter your status as a parent, school administrator. religious leader, journalist or politician, there will be a price to pay. My mother used LTEs, my father was willing to "kick some ...".
Tom Brokaw was not part of the so-called greatest generation. He is a mouthpiece for....fill in the blanks. As always, my opinions are worth no more than yours.
Look up at the stars and not down at your feet. Try to make sense of what you see, and wonder about what makes the universe exist. Be curious. Stephen Hawking
Surely, you can't be serious?
That just goes against 75 years of accepted wisdom in the Halls of Smart People.
Improve the Resilience Resource Library by adding your links.
Vote Smart - Just the Facts - 40,000 politicians by name or zipcode
I am serious
and don't call me Shirley.
And after the War On Drugs turned out so well--who knew.
In fact, all these Wars just seem to further enrich the 1%. It's not a bug, it's a feature.
chuck utzman
TULSI 2020
Thanks chuckutzman
Look up at the stars and not down at your feet. Try to make sense of what you see, and wonder about what makes the universe exist. Be curious. Stephen Hawking
If Clinton gets elected. . .
We're in for a world of hate.
Clinton is possibly the most immoral person to reach her level
It's all a game to her and the object is to advance Hillary as many places on the board as possible. Kill Khaddafi, that's a win, you advance 5 squares. If you gloat over it you get an extra bonus square.
If Clinton wins it really signifies a complete takeover of the US by Wall Street and the MIC. Read her website. She's doing another Obama. Sounds good but look at what is really promised, practically nothing.
The Neocons are drooling over her potential victory. Get ready to protest, and I don't mean a nice walk in the street on a Sunny day. I mean serious anti-war protests. Noam Chomsky believes that only protest can change things. The Vietnam war stopped when it was clear that business as usual was not possible and the people were angry, very angry. It spilled over into the mainstream, e.g. Walter Chronkite, and it became impossible to ignore.
Here's an interesting thing. The British military folks voted 90% for BREXIT, because they were tired of laying their lives on the line for the U.S. They even brought dark pens to the polling booths to make sure that their ballots were counted. It's about time to say enough is enough. Doesn't matter that it's a Democrat in office, after all the Vietnam protests were directed against Lyndon Johnson when he was in office. Big difference is that he did not want to be at war, she does. This is moral depravity at a level never seen before.
Capitalism has always been the rule of the people by the oligarchs. You only have two choices, eliminate them or restrict their power.
Can you give a link to that fact about how the military voted?
I'd LOVE to be able to post that here and there
here
https://geopolitics.co/2016/06/27/british-army-unit-voted-90-to-leave-eu/
Capitalism has always been the rule of the people by the oligarchs. You only have two choices, eliminate them or restrict their power.
I've said this before...
Hillary's big political problem is Obama. In 2008, a lot of us were fooled into thinking Obama was a progressive (while the signs were there that he was not, I admit). In 2016, we are not fooled by Hillary. In fact, we knew who she was in 2008.
Democrats, we tried to warn you. How is that guilt and shame working out?
some people's counterintuition is awfully counterintuitive
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
Yeh, I couldn't get over that word
How exactly is it "counterintuitive" to the author?
I find it shocking they found it counterintuitive
This quote is mind-boggling:
Are they really that incapable of seeing the "enemy" as human beings? How would THEY (the military "strategists") react if their families were being bombed? Maybe figure that out in advance, and then just assume that the insurgents are going to react pretty much the same way.
Surprise, surprise, surprise
Other people in other countries, even (gulp) darker people react exactly the same way we'd react if someone bombed us?
Dig within. There lies the wellspring of all good. Ever dig and it will ever flow
Marcus Aurelius
Not to worry. Obama has the answer
More propaganda!
Interesting thought
Based on this one line:
Wouldn't it be interesting if some game developer decided to make a war based game that actually reflected real life war and its consequences? Probably wouldn't happen though.
Actually working on a design doc on it...
With a friend of mine online. Essentially it emphasizes the fear, uncertainty, and unclear situation, combined with a healthy dose of psychology of why people act the way they do in war zones, and my own personal experience of the nightmare.
Closest we have right now is Civilization V, and that's only because getting involved in wars decimates your economy and is something you want to avoid as much as humanly possible.
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
Even Civ V
isn't that great of a teacher of what war does to an economy.
I actually think Arma may be the closest thing we have to a life-like war simulator right now. The little I played of the Arma series was definitely way closer than Battlefield or Call of Duty, at least.
This War of Mine was painful...
And isn't really FUN as a game goes, but it does get across the bleakness and hideous nature of war. (One of the designers lived through Bosnia)
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BALBUyoTxQM]
I'm more of a strategy person, so my design goes towards that. (Long Dark gets across that kind of fear well, and I want to try to work with that...)
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
I always liked Civ for that reason...
War was a last option and it was devastating for both parties. If you occupied a shitty spot on the map, say Northern Africa, you had limited resources and limited places to build. If the other territories didn't give you a token city space to survive, you had no choice but to attack. There was not 'luck' in attacking like Risk, you both just lost populations in the disputed space. The skill 'military' just meant you got to play last, it didn't lessen your devastation or increase your components. Diplomacy was the best strategy.
Democrats, we tried to warn you. How is that guilt and shame working out?
see above
edited from below to above
Look up at the stars and not down at your feet. Try to make sense of what you see, and wonder about what makes the universe exist. Be curious. Stephen Hawking
New Book Out: How to Kill Wedding Parties and Influence People
Improve the Resilience Resource Library by adding your links.
Vote Smart - Just the Facts - 40,000 politicians by name or zipcode
Please don't forget hospital bombings!
"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"
Believe me, duckpin, I haven't forgotten
but the title would have been too long.
So much stupidity perpetrated for generations now and still the complete and utter failure of the concept of killing people to make friends hasn't sunk in at the Pentagon or Congress.
Improve the Resilience Resource Library by adding your links.
Vote Smart - Just the Facts - 40,000 politicians by name or zipcode
I didn't think you had A.B. I just felt the urge
to activate the keyboard and recall our sorry history from Hanoi onwards of bombing civilian targets, even humanitarian ones.
"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"
Medecins Sans Frontieres
Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) is an international, independent, medical humanitarian organisation. Worthy of a drone strike, oui or non?
Look up at the stars and not down at your feet. Try to make sense of what you see, and wonder about what makes the universe exist. Be curious. Stephen Hawking
How dare they help people in an area where we're trying
to kill 'em! It's outrageous and deplorable because it interferes with our war
crimesefforts.It was their
fucking fault for being touchy feely..
or something like that.
USA is, INDEED, exceptional.
NOBODY since Hitler is like USA!
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
when I was a tyke: 1964
I read an editorial in class that said if we bomb the Vietnamese it would end the war "because..."
Several of my classmates, 13 years of age, talked to me after class and gave me lots of good reasons why bombing was a stupid idea and they were right.
Now you'd think if 13 years old, 50 years ago, knew bombing was bad, that grownups of today would know so, too. And they might. It could very well be that this is a win-win situation for them. It allows them to satisfy their blood lust while using up weapons that have to be replenished, thus enriching their friends. And since it doesn't work they get to blow up more stuff. It's not like anyone responsible is looking at this and thinking about peace (other than how to avoid it)
Shah, thank you for all that you do.
Peace is not in popular demand?
Look up at the stars and not down at your feet. Try to make sense of what you see, and wonder about what makes the universe exist. Be curious. Stephen Hawking
Peace is not a money-maker for the munitions set
"The justness of individual land right is not justifiable to those to whom the land by right of first claim collectively belonged"
Not only is it not effective, it's unimaginative.
Warfare has been constantly a matter of adjusting tactics to the situation. Doing the same thing, even a "Perfect" strategy, is how you lose.
Course the US hasn't changed its tactics and strategies since WWII. We THOUGHT we did after Vietnam, but it was just a matter of picking a battle we could win. (Saddam ironically, played by our rules, which is why he lost.)
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
funding from Saudi Arabia
Our efforts would be much better directed towards cutting off the flow of cash from rich Saudis to ISIS. And somehow influencing the flow of weapons. Which is kind of ironic as we are the world's leading arms exporter.
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
Pretty hard to "influence the flow of weapons"
when we are the ones providing them to the murderous "moderates". Just Googling "US provides arms to jihadis" will get you pages of stuff, dating back years (decades) but here's a relatively recent piece:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/19/us-weapons-to-syri...
We would be way better off...
If in 2001, after the Towers fell, the President used his extreme popularity to get us off of our oil addiction. We could have spent $4 Trillion on getting us on sustainable energy. But we elected an oil man. The world is not going to give us many more chances.
Democrats, we tried to warn you. How is that guilt and shame working out?
Delayed revenge
It might be even more useful to see if there is a link between US violence in the ME and later acts of terrorism.
I think that we have been extraordinarily lucky as a nation to be able to perform mass murder and get away with it. Has Vietnam sought revenge? I am thinking that we have run out of luck, that those whose families we have killed in the last ten plus years will want revenge for a long time.
There is also the issue of proportionality. The US has committee violence on a massive scale. Were not interested unless we can kill 100,000, and preferably 1,000,000. Take all of the total terrorism against us and it is insignificant. In fact, the most logical course would be to ignore it. But that would be to miss an opportunity to rev up the masses to support yet another US military massacre of people of yet another third world country. Heh, how about bombing Russia or China? No. What's the matter, the us military only picks on defenceless countries? That's why ISIS is a totally new asymmetrical game. So we complain at their barbarism? What, you've got to be kidding me, we maxed out on that scale.
Capitalism has always been the rule of the people by the oligarchs. You only have two choices, eliminate them or restrict their power.
Gambling is going on at Rick's?
No way!
"They'll say we're disturbing the peace, but there is no peace. What really bothers them is that we are disturbing the war." Howard Zinn
If another country invaded the United States
And people fought back against the invaders, would they be called insurgents or terrorists?
The people in Iraq had every right to defend themselves from the invading countries.
Especially after Saddam was killed. Wasn't that the reason for the invasion in the first place?
Funny how so many other coups that removed the elected government from power was done in the middle of the night and only took a few people.
So why did it take the militaries of other countries to remove Saddam?
And remember how they protected the oil fields instead of the antiques buildings.
Oh, and why are we back in Iraq over their government's opposition if Saddam is gone?
Hillary did say that Iraq is open for business.
And remember that it's only called terrorism when innocent Americans die.
It's called self defense when hospitals, weddings and other social gatherings full of innocent civilians.
Trump and his followers have no problem killing the families of terrorists, so they should be okay with the terrorists killing the families of the soldiers that killed their families. Right?
Too bad that so many Americans believe that our troops are fighting to defend this country and our freedoms.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.
~Hannah Arendt
they would be called WOLVERINES!!!!
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.
If all you have is a hammer...
...all problems look like nails.
The political revolution continues
I'm telling you guys --
we need to bomb our enemies with Kudzu plants. For desert regions; GMO droubt proof Kudzu. Choke 'em out with Kudzu. Cover all their roads and farms. mayun.
"I can't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm frightened of the old ones."
John Cage
Kudzu is very nutritious
and has medicinal qualities, I believe. It's the solution to world peace!
What really happened in Vietnam?
The experience of Vietnam and the failure to win a guerrilla war should have been a lesson.
I remember at the time reading I F Stone's weekly about how Americans were sure with our latest technology we could not loose.
I was overwhelmed when I read the short book by Nick Turse "Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam"
The book is reviewed by the outstanding war correspondent Johnathan Shell in 2014
At Last: The Real Story of the Vietnam War New book proves murder, rape and torture were not the exception in Vietnam, they were the norm.
Thank you for mentioning Turse and his book
a must read IMO.
When will we stop electing
When will we stop electing these morons? the 1% seems to love propping up these sycophantic psychos, and not work towards a better world where while they still will be well off, the rest of us could be better off than we are now. There may be an awakening amongst the masses, a shift as it were, but until the 10% and 1% also stay in their happy little bubbles wake the fuck up and also see the parasitic carnage they cause, things will remain the same.
The Greed virus has become more virulent, and it turns folks into life sucking parasites, and folks wonder why we have global climate de-stabilization taking place as a result of corporate malfeasance? or the corruption we face? or the wars we see all the time in the news?
Used to be that the wise women of the Iriqouis chose the men who were physically and mentally healthy to act as representatives of their tribes on the larger Irqouis Council, which was the model the founding fathers used to base our congress upon. Over the years, we lost the part of sound minded individuals as our reps and instead we get the insane and stupid to represent us, no surprise to me why the world is going to hell in a hand basket!
So long, and thanks for all the fish
American Exceptionalism...
Things won't change until there is a complete collapse or Americans stop thinking our military is the biggest bested evah! and cannot fail it can only be failed. My money is on 'collapse'.
Democrats, we tried to warn you. How is that guilt and shame working out?
Could it be
that "Stats" like these,
are really NOT something that can be swept under the rug,
-- No Matter how much the Drone-masters might try ...
Nearly 90% Of Those Killed By US Drones Were Not Intended Targets During Five-Month Span: Report
by Jeff Stone, ibtimes.com -- 10/15/15
https://theintercept.com/drone-papers/the-assassination-complex/
Never mind these other "Stats" ... that just 'drone on' and on and on ...
pdf report
web site
the Shock and Awe
somehow has worn off ... it's just more of the same SOP, these days ...
even if the shellshock never really goes away,
depending how close you were to those rockets,
red glare.
Nobody in the MSM...
Is going to read those stats on air. The sponsorships would stop.
Democrats, we tried to warn you. How is that guilt and shame working out?
You are assuming that the goal is peace...
...It is not. The goal is to make money. And keeping people afraid is the easiest way to keep them compliant for all the other shit they want to pull on us, like a global race to the bottom on wages, massive deregulation, corporate hegemony and the destruction of Democracy...
I want my two dollars!