The Ancient Art of Modern Warfare

Is war rational? The great philosopher of war, Carl von Clausewitz, was a product of three schools of education: the classical tradition of Aristotle, the enlightenment philosophers such as Kant, and the practical experience of Napoleon. Each of these three challenged and opposed the other two. His work, On War expresses this tension and opposition. In his effort to develop a comprehensive theory...

Since at least the 1940’s, policy and strategic thinking uses the so-called rational actor model in determining what competitors and partners may do, how to respond to them, and how they may react in return. Even considering variations to that model to explain less than optimal choices by these actors, there appears to be enough irrationality by state and non-state actors to call into question whe...

I haven’t posted for a few weeks mostly because the current armed conflict with Iran poses a lot of questions that I don’t have answers for. One thing I might have an answer for is the question about wars of choice. Recently, this term is used in a way that implies that this armed conflict is illegitimate or unethical. Like many terms used by any faction with intended political impact, the term is...

Any quick net search for the term “cyber mercenary” will result in dozens, if not hundreds of entries. These concerns largely focus on the effect these persons or entities have on personal freedoms, economic activity, and the ability of hackers and States can work together to undermine human rights. What about cyber mercenaries and warfare? Can – or do – real mercenaries of the cyber domain of war...

As I post this, the cease-fires in Lebanon and Iran are still holding, and much longer than I expected. We usually think of cease fires as a good thing, enabling humanitarian activity and at least pause the death and destruction. That is not, however, the purpose behind any suspension in fighting a war. In this episode I examine the real reasons for most truces or cease fires, explore probable mot...

Every time the United States or Israel use military force, there are immediate claims that those military forces are committing war crimes. I also note that such claims are never made about the opposing side, whether that is Hamas, Hizbollah, Houthis, Iran or any other state or non-state armed group opposing Western armed forces. It also seems that there are voices that insist than any military op...

The United States is in yet another war. The usual pundits say that we cannot win while others say we have already won. The same people seem to say nearly the same things about Russia’s war in Ukraine. I doubt that pundits in either camp can coherently describe what winning or losing a war means or looks like. So, in this episode, I will once again lean heavily on Carl von Clausewitz to describe w...

I am not sure, but I think that I mention the Laws and Customs of War in about half of my episodes. (Clausewitz, of course features in almost EVERY episode -- except this one.) There is one part of the Law of War that is infrequently discussed. So infrequent that the term International Humanitarian Law (IHL) doesn’t even include it. The International Committee of the Red Cross even says that it is...

I believe that the Law of War remains valid in modern warfare and is essential to establishing peace after war. Despite that belief we see States such as Russia and Iran and non-state groups such as Hamas operate in a manner that looks like violating the most fundamental aspects of the law of war, including deliberate targeting of civilians, to be an objective rather than a restriction. In this ep...

In podcast episode 128, posted just before Operation Epic Fury began, I outlined how I think that an attack on Iran could be just, necessary, and what I perceived as a path to achieve the goals expressed by the U.S. Government in the weeks leading to the start of the war. I did not expect this to be a blueprint for what would actually happen. What I really did not expect was for the conduct of the...

In the last episode, I said that I would compare we know about Operation Epic Fury against the Weinberger-Powell doctrine for the use of American military force. I need to push that off for a week. Current events – and some pushback from my previous episode – require me to revisit my assessment of Just Cause in our attacking Iran.  I stand by my initial assessment in Episode 128, which I recorded...

I keep on trying to podcast about other things and current events keep distracting me. In my previous episode in this series, “The Persian Problem, I described some conditions under which U.S. military action against Iran would meet the Jus Ad Bellum criteria of Just War Theory. That description was, at the time I posted it, theoretical. Now we have the reality of having initiated combat operation...

By the time anyone reads or listens to this podcast, the situation with Iran may be completely different than when I write this. In keeping with the intent of this podcast series, however, I thought it might be worthwhile to explore the possibility of intervention in Iran in a way that is in line with the enduring principles of war. In doing this I am not advocating such an intervention. Neither d...

Can strategic bombing of cities ever be justified? In the previous episode of this podcast series (E126), Col. Altieri said that the air force always considers itself revolutionary. Before I began recording, he cited strategic bombing in World War Two as both revolutionary and consistent with Clausewitz’s concept of making things so painful that the enemy will not continue to resist. I responded,...

The philosopher of war, Carl von Clausewitz, described three legs that support the architecture of war: Primordial violence, the play of chance, and reason. Clausewitz aligned the element of chance the military. Every revolution brings unintended consequences -- the free play of chance. A revolution in military affairs, therefore, means exponential chance to affect the other legs of that trinity....

The inevitable never happens. It is the unexpected always. -- J.M. Keynes 1938   Almost everyone plays with predicting the future. Persons who speak with presumed authority and say that some outlandish thing is inevitable often get a lot of media attention. The more media attention, the more people come to think that the outlandish thing really is inevitable. In warfare, I have lived through the i...

The idea that we would invade Greenland is about the stupidest idea I ever heard. I find it difficult to believe that anyone believed that implying the United States might use military force was anything other than a negotiating tactic. An ill-advised negotiating tactic, but still, nothing more than that. Putting aside the fear and anger generated from different sources there are concerns and ques...

Recently, there has been controversy over public statements from some politicians about the responsibility of members of the armed forces to disobey unlawful orders. In theory, there should be nothing objectionable about that. Members of the armed forces, from the lowest enlisted to the highest general or admiral, receive regular instruction on the laws and customs of war and our responsibilities...

This series on Terrorism is wrapping up with the problem of state sponsored terrorism. This form of international terrorism is most clearly a method of warfare, with the state using terrorist organizations as deniable proxies in armed conflict. International law, however, does not recognize that form of terrorism as war, but as criminal acts subject only criminal jurisprudence. This situation does...

In the last few episodes, I explained that international terrorism can be considered a war form and how it has been practiced through history. I described that, according to international law, terrorism is a crime and should be addressed as such. I also described how criminal laws are frequently inadequate to deal with terrorism used as a form of warfare. This leads to the question of how states d...

If terrorism, unlawfully attacking civilian targets to achieve a political outcome, is a modern war form, a different manner of armed conflict. When terrorist attacks are planned, organized, and operate from a foreign country, or otherwise use that country as a safe haven, what are the options of the attacked State in using military force to fight this new form of armed conflict?  This episode of...

I decided to change the trajectory of this series. Rather than continue with the history of terrorism, I am jumping ahead to how terrorism fits within the overarching philosophy of war. The manifestation of terrorism as it has evolved in the past century is not inconsistent with our understanding of war. Understanding that will help us to understand the ways and means to defeat it.   The informati...

This continues my description of terrorism and warfare. The previous episode defined terrorism. This episode traces terroristic attacks from the Bible to the First World War and how it differed from modern terrorism. World War One had profound impacts on almost every aspects of human civilization and this included the use of terror to achieve political ends.   The information in these podcasts is...

What is terrorism? Is it something as old as warfare or something that has changed the nature of war? Is fighting terrorism the same as counterinsurgency? Despite more than two decades of the so-called War on Terror, we seem no closer to ending terrorism that we were when the Black September group attacked the Olympic Village in 1972. Before we can propose solutions to a problem, we must start by...

I am reluctant to post much of anything about the current armed conflict in Gaza. As the saying goes, the first casualty in war is the truth, and the truth of this saying is manifest in Gaza. It is almost impossible to separate information from information operations by either side. The International Committee of the Red Cross cites allegations of grave beaches of the law of war by both sides. In...