Attrition Warfare

Willy OAM, who has a popular website discussing the Ukraine war, often say something like, “According to attrition warfare doctrine…” Could anyone out there remind me where such doctrine is written down or who is the supposed attrition warfare guru? I’m uncertain there really is such a thing, or if there is, it is pretty thin gruel. Yes, attrition is a method generally mixed with other ways of going about battles, campaigns, wars and so on, but a whole doctrine on ‘attrition warfare’? Educate me. For some reason I ignored it, missed it, dismissed it. I dunno. Even the greatest living military strategy theorist (the current GLMST) can suffer gaps. Don’t want that. Please speak up.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Morale and Capacity to Fight

Even the dullest ends-ways-means strategerist admits the basic wisdom of balancing one’s capacity to fight with whatever he wants to do and how. There is no separate section on capacity to fight in On Multiform War, but maybe in the 2025 update. It’s efficient for the purpose of discussion to divide war-making capacity into four broad categories – capacity to create lethal mass; capacity to visit that lethal mass on the enemy; capacity to create influential ideas; and capacity to deliver those ideas to the right audiences. I usually don’t count resolve (morale, will, diligence) as a separate category. I prefer to keep that quantity aside as the psychological motor of the other four categories. No big deal, we could make resolve the fifth category, and we could even add deterring the other guy’s capacities as a sixth. Secrecy and spying might be a useful seventh category. With all that as a preface, let’s consider what Arthur Conan Doyle said of British resolve during the Boer War: “The deepest instincts of the nation told it must fight and win, or forever abdicate its position in the world.” Seems applicable. What do I really know about Russian resolve as to the war in Ukraine? Meh. You could easily have better information and insight. My just reading what Putin has to say is a sorely slim slice of input. Still, it seems that for Russia — that is, Russia the nation, the Russians of Russia writ large — losing the war is not an option; whereas for the nascent inchoate nation of Ukraine, losing sooner than later might be the preferred solution. (No, I don’t presume to speak for the Ukrainian nation any more than for the Russian.) What is the NATO level of resolve? It feels sketchy to even lend NATO enough person status as to assign it a level of unified will. As for battlefield morale, some units on the Ukraine side have excellent morale and discipline. Many do not. (Sadly, among the ones that do are some straight up Nazis. Odd that.) Russian battlefield morale has improved generally. So… looking at capacities overall, the Russian side can create more lethal mass and can move that mass. It has excellent spying capacity. Moreover, the Russians appear to have greater resolve at every level. As for ideas and the ability to deliver them to the right audiences, is there really any NATO advantage? What seems to be the NATO plan, execution now impending – is a summer offensive surge against the Russian lines.  It does not appear balanced with capacity, unless the ends are quite limited. The Russians have to see that. They know the means do not exist to kick them out entirely.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

It is Democratic to Vote Democratic?

It seems that just now the question of whether the United States is a democracy has come to the public conversational fore. I think that’s great, as any among you who for whatever sad reason might have read what I’ve written on the subject would suppose. We as a country had some time ago been led by Democrats in the Democratic Party, Democrats in academe and Democrats in media to intone over and over that the United States was a democracy, that we fought for democracy, should spread democracy and that the word democracy was synonymous with good. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party of the United States succeeded in federal court arguing that the party was not a democracy and could pick its leaders in any way they wanted. (Wilding, et. al. v. DNC Services). The Democrats were in court on a related democracy issue (white primaries) in the 30’s and 40s ( Grovey v. Townsend and Smith v. Allwright). Owning words and their public meaning is big strategy for Democrats, but it gives us a lot of tell, a lot of clues as to the who’s who. I just saw a clip of a CNN huff piece in which George Bush the younger is shown saying “Democracy remains the definition of political legitimacy.” Political Scientists love the word legitimacy. Political Science likes hollow words. All Democrats are Political Scientists. It’s science. Political Scientists are not legit scientists. That’s science too. Democrats are not democrats. George Bush was Republican but not republican. America is not a democracy, it’s (supposed to be) a republic, but our government is Democratic, not the least bit democratic, and not republican, even when Republican. You get it. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting about what to have for din-din. That said, the founders thought elections could help kick the bums out. Vote.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Matt Taibbi, Walter Kirn and Fyodor Dostoevsky Walk into a Bar

Nah, no punchline. In Mother Russia, joke make you. Taibbi and Kirn host a show called ‘America This Week’ on substack. Back on June 9th, the title of their discussion was “The Grand Inquisitor” by Fyodor Dostoevsky. It’s a stand-alone (more or less) short story at the beginning of The Brothers Karamazov. Yeah yeah, I know, I didn’t either. But some guys in my old office at Ft. Leavenworth probably did. Summarized summary: Dostoevsky explains the nearly inexplicable by imagining Torquemada in a conversation with Jesus Christ. The former mansplains to Jesus why the latter got it all wrong, and immorally so at that. I highly recommend reading the short story and listening to the discussion Walter and Matt have about that story. You might have to pay their fee. According to the discussants, Fyodor anticipated the Russian Revolution, or at least its fundamental justifications. The story does more than that. For those of you who would like to see a long-form explanation of propaganda of the deed, or of why the Faucies and Schwabs of the world are so flippant about killing lots and lots of folk, well — Dostoevsky.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

WfA 2025 The Culture Part

We are already well into suffering the cultural part of the War for America. That in mind, today, 14 June, I want to recommend and second the work of J.J. Sefton at Ace of Spades HQ (Ace of Spades HQ (mu.nu) He has recently been battling some personal medical issues but (overcoming the de-gumptioning effects of both malady and treatment) provides us with some of the most entertaining, intelligent and resolute insights and information. Go there. He is a lot better than I am. (Then come back, you do not deserve J.J. Sefton)

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The National Scourge of False Witness

(Deuteronomy 19: 18-19 King James Version)

And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother;

Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you.

President Trump should not bury the hatchet when he is re-elected. He should seek prosecution of all the men and women who knowingly and illegally abused government process and position against him and others. End impunity.

Posted in Culture, Jurisprudence, Lawfare, The 2024 Elections, The War for America, Worldview | 2 Comments

Ukrainian Participation at D-Day Memorial?

Haven’t said anything recently about the stupid Ukraine war. So much moving so fast.  Let’s start with Macron. The Frenchies are now all about allowing Ukraine to fire ‘western’ weapons into Russia? They even want to send more ‘western’ military personnel into Ukraine to do it — as though that means the ‘westerns’ are still not actually at war with Russia. Brilliant international lawyers these guys. I can even see through it. Last time I lent my high-power to a murderer, they implicated me in the crime. Go figure. Putin already noted publicly that turn and turn-about is fair play. Anyhow, if I were France, and I’m glad I’m not, but if I were, I’d send a lot more naval units down off the coast of the Guyane space center. Might not do much good. Less than 120 miles from Oiapoque to a centre de lancement.  Too many governments down that way now flat-out Marxist and might be delighted to help the Ruskies put the kremlin kaboshski on the French space program, all the while being just as judicious about it as les comediens. Seems like the Niger debacle might have taught a lesson, but noooo.

So you think I’m being just too snarky, cute by half here? I’m just a tad chaffed seeing sweatshirt Zelensky in his sweatshirt feted by the folk at the D-Day memorial admiring his sweatshirt. World on its head. Tell me that guy does not support and is not supported by a whole bunch of neo-Nazis. Irony is funny, right? So many nifty historic fictions out there giving twists to what happened in WWII, like The Man in the High Castle. As I recall, in real life we sided with the left-socialists to defeat the right-socialists, the latter deemed more dangerous, German science and whatnot. Could it have gone the other way? I don’t believe in that kind of hypothetical re-write history stuff, but it is fun. What if the British government had made peace with the Nazis (not like it wasn’t close), followed in turn by the US government? What if we had sided with Hitler against Stalin by just lending a blind eye? Could we have looked away just a little more than we did? Maybe getting a few thousand more Jews to Zion in return? Hard to say, all that is silly speculation, but here we are fighting the Russians, while praising a gnome dictator who is not democratic in the least. Here we are siding with, even encouraging governments that have been turning their countries over to Jew-hating Islamists. Are we going to play like as though, somehow, actually, in some weird way, Ukraine was, on 6 June 1944, more ally than the rest of the Soviet Union was on June 6, 1944? Please make it stop.

Posted in Clausewitz Sucks, Conflict Geography, Conflict Geography, Geography, Iberoamerica, Strategy | Leave a comment

Darling, War 102

Our friend Paul Darling, author of Taliban Safari, is creating an educational series of audio podcasts on the warfare. He calls it War 102. Here are the links: War 102 (buzzsprout.com); https://open.spotify.com/show/5HFMjbVY0IDCnyMJAhmUmz

He has five episodes in the can and available for your enlightenment, titled as follows:

Episode Zero: Why War 102

Episode 1: What is War

Episode 2: The Levels of War

Episode 3: The Clausewitz Glossary

Episode 4: The Principles of War

Go listen.  They each run about fifteen minutes.  I’ll also put them up somewhere here on Liberty Bristles in a day or two. This is great. I hope they motivate Geoff Demarest to get on with his 3-minute strategery vids. I also suspect we’ll be hearing some direct, crass unnecessary discordance from Geoff after he listens in. That guy.

Posted in Clausewitz Sucks, Strategy, Uncategorized | 1 Comment

The Upcoming Elections

This post is for those of you seeking my advice regarding the upcoming 2024 federal elections.  Ha ha…You must be kidding me…get a life. Yes, well, getting over your lack of self-respect, here is what I think.

We need to ignore as best as possible the Trump vs Biden conversation.  We need to ignore the ‘Biden is a jerk, Biden is too old, Biden is senile’ messaging and narrative. I believe all that is red herring. We have to make the contest Trump vs the Democratic Party of the United States. We need to drum on the idea that the Democratic Party is the evil entity. The actual leadership of that evil entity is looking for a pathway past Biden-Harris, and we need to be ready for however that play unfolds. Biden is not the issue and has not been for some time. Here is a chart…

Potential differences if Trump is or is not elected:

Issue/election outcomeNot Trump (Dem Party Control)Trump (Greater MAGA influence)
AbortionFunded right at any time.Restricted, not federally funded and left to States.
Illegal ImmigrationOpen and encouraged. Amnesty and suffrage pushed forcefully.Reduced. Some deportation, possible widespread deportation.
Federal govt regulationIncreased. Definite movement toward social credit scoring, federal control over individual travel, land ownership and finances.Decreased federal regulation. Possible decrease in federal agency powers, at least in selected agencies like ATF, EPA, Education
Global Warming Redistribution of (a lot of) money to ‘solve’ the non-problem. Dem Party/US Gov participation in international and NGO identities scamming the money.Little direct funding to stop warming and less government participation in international or NGO scam operations
Health CareFurther move toward fully nationalized health care system. Greater social control by ‘health’ agencies. Possible staged pandemic.Some movement toward freer market system elements. Curtailing and investigation of federal health agencies. Unlikely to see pandemic.
Foreign PolicyIncreased subordination to international organizations, NGOsDemotion of international organizations, NGOs.
..Continued shift toward Iran, away from Israel.Solidified support to Israel.
..Favorable toward Chinese CCP.Rebalance away from Chinese CCP.
..Rapprochement with Cubans.calling out Cubans, Bolivarians.
..Continue funding weapons to Zelensky regime if the Russians have not already won.Cutting losses and redirecting defense spending to not include Zelensky regime or fighting against Russia.
..Democratic Party will seek ways to further abandon Taiwan and allow reunification of China under CCP control.Defense of Taiwan reaffirmed and US defense spending and deployment shifted toward that end.
EducationHeavy support to traditional teachers’ union.Push toward vouchers and decrease of teachers’ union control.
Free SpeechMove toward hate speech controls and independence of university administrative control over student and faculty speech.Movement back toward full observance of freedom of speech.
Right to Bear ArmsWidespread efforts at gun control.Spread observance of right to bear arms.
Free Exercise of religionConstrictions on religious liberties.Protection of Freedom of Religious Expression.
Rule of LawLikely impunity for federal agency violators of individual rights.Possible prosecution of high-ranking violators of individual liberties.
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Sieg Heil

OK, today we need to give Volodymyr a new title as he is evidently no longer President, but something else under martial law. I’m going with Obergruppenführer Zelensky. Too much rank? Wrong language?

Posted in Clausewitz Sucks, Jurisprudence, Strategy, Worldview | 1 Comment