Have you read this article and do you agree or disagree - Is Washington Next?

2015-11-21T11:06:07-05:00

Have you read this article and do you agree or disagree - Is Washington Next?

RP Members what do you think? Is COL Don Anderson right?

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/washington-next-col-don-anderson?trk=hp-feed-article-title-publish

By Col Don Anderson
Asymetrical Outreach for the Asymetricaly Challenged Dominici Templarii Navitas

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Nov 21 at 2015 11:07 AM

2015-11-21T11:07:35-05:00

No COL Mikel J. Burroughs I had not read this article yet - Is Washington Next?
I think New York, Chicago or LA would be next.
Washington has too much protection - internal and external and not nearly enough lucrative human targets. Tysons Corner Mall is a target ISIS would like to hit on Black friday.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 21 at 2015 11:38 AM

2015-11-21T11:38:58-05:00

COL Mikel J. Burroughs, I believe ISIS sent a message that Washington is next. I highly doubt that. There are larger, more hostile cities they could attack. Down here on the coast, and where one of the largest chemical and refineries are, an attack would be devastating on lives, economy, and parts of the world. An attack on our Port Of Houston and the refineries and chemical plants would be a chain reaction because they are so close together.
See statistics:
QUICK FACTS
Texas was the leading crude oil-producing state in the nation in 2013 and exceeded production levels even from the federal offshore areas.
As of January 2014, the 27 petroleum refineries in Texas had a capacity of over 5.1 million barrels of crude oil per day and accounted for 29% of total U.S. refining capacity.
Texas accounted for about 29% of U.S. marketed natural gas production in 2013, making it the leading natural gas producer among the states.
Texas leads the nation in wind-powered generation capacity with over 12,000 megawatts; in 2013 Texas generated almost 36 million megawatthours of electricity from wind energy.
West Texas Intermediate (WTI), a grade of crude oil produced in Texas and southern Oklahoma, is traded in the domestic spot market at Cushing, Oklahoma, where it serves as a benchmark for oil pricing.
The average annual electricity cost per Texas household is $1,801, among the highest in the nation; the cost is similar to other warm weather states like Florida, according to EIA's Residential Energy Consumption Survey.
Last Updated: March 27, 2014

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 21 at 2015 12:54 PM

2015-11-21T12:54:39-05:00

COL Mikel J. Burroughs Sir, there are some thoughts I've had. He is right we cannot fight an unconventional army using conventional means. I've thought this many times before. I can't help but to think of another time, as did the author when we (dare I say lost) because of trying to follow the same doctrine, i.e.Vietnam. Target strikes of weapons systems is used to support ground troops (to protect them), it seems a waste of effort to employ CAS strikes a weapon when there are much more valuable targets to hit. Knowing that CAS strikes requires close coordination with ground forces these types of strikes cause me to wonder what is really going on. Should we not be looking for and destroying CC targets with DAS. Would this not be a more effective way of ending things?

More food for thought. This article gives a count of 20,000 being the number we have killed in the past year. This causes me to pause because foreign intelligence estimates has their total number at 31,500 men. Hmm something doesn't seem right either his calculation isn't right or there's something wrong with the Foreign Intelligence estimate. Which is it? There are claims by others that the ISIS total number is about 200,000 which would allow it to remain sustainable even with the loss of 20,000. This makes much more sense to me as a logical reason why they are not defeated.

Also current events are amazingly similar to some strategic war scenarios that were worked on in the past. It has the feeling of deja vue. It's going to be very difficult if not impossible to defeat a enemy that has a "fighter in every house", has the advantage of terrain familiarity and the support of the local population using airstrikes alone. As I've said before since ISIS lacks the industrial complexes to manufacture their own weapons, then one must assume the weapons are being brought in. This needs to be cut off.

Getting back on track, this article has a lot of insight and reading it is like a repeat of history when one considers the expansion and enforcement (psychological brain washing) of the Nazi movement. Thankfully then we had some excellent military leaders and politicians who were supportive. Hopefully we'll see a change soon in our political leadership.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 21 at 2015 4:06 PM

2015-11-21T16:06:58-05:00

They will try.
And if they do, even then I am not sure that we will respond in an effective, meaningful way.
We seem very determined to sit this one out.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Nov 21 at 2015 5:53 PM

2015-11-21T17:53:14-05:00

Nope. Why bother? Those kinds of targets are cliches. If I were ISIS, I would go after small towns with nonexistent security. All it takes is twelve guys in little Podunk towns across America going to their local Wal-Mart, buying weapons and ammo, and going on a shooting spree. They wouldn't even have to leave the parking lots. With twenty minutes of effort and a few hundred bucks, ISIS can be credited with being a nation wide hive of evil masterminds... Why bother with hard targets at all?

Response by COL Ted Mc made Nov 22 at 2015 1:10 PM

2015-11-22T13:10:32-05:00

COL Mikel J. Burroughs - Mikiel; An excellent article.

However, I suspect that Col. Anderson is overlooking the obvious and that is that the ISISites DO NOT think the same way that we do. An attack on the enemy's capital would seem to be an attack that would deal a crushing blow to the enemy - in our point of view. It might well not seem the same to the ISISites.

Knowing the American temperament I'd be rather reluctant to accept the short-term gains of an attack on America's "sacred symbols" (regardless of how successful that attack was) when I knew that that attack was HIGHLY likely to get the American people MUCH more angry than afraid.

Rather than a "concentrated" attack, I'd be looking at a whole series of "coordinated" attacks that could be carried out by small numbers of people operating independently and "under orders" which only generally specify the target type(s) but operating to (more or less) the same timetable and I strongly suspect that that is what the ISISites are attempting.

Admittedly a whole series of "coordinated" attacks would also get the American people mad BUT it would be much more effective in raising the "fear factor" and hence further the drift away from the levels of freedom and liberty which the United States of America stands for (regardless of whether it actually delivers those levels) and would do so in an unmistakable manner.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 22 at 2015 9:30 PM

2015-11-22T21:30:50-05:00

As the article states one of the things that makes this enemy particularly challenging is that it fights unconventionally. ISIS used Paris to spread a message of fear and show that they have the ability to attack anywhere. In the words of former President Bush, "Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America. These acts shatter steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American resolve." We have been attacked before and we could be attacked again, however the enemy's fear-mongering and violence will not undermine our resolve to defeat terrorist threats including ISIS.