You have certainly explained the reason why Islam was so easily joined to the Nazi philosophy, and why Amin al Husseini was so enamoured with the third reich.
The key difference between nazis and AQ is in the structure.
Nazism was a conventional vertical organization - think Pyramid.
Hitler believed in conventional military tactics with a terrorist wing (The SS). That was his strength when he was the strongest but also led to his demise when a stronger military (the allies) was created.
The insurgents/guerrillas in France, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Russia inflicted enormous punishment on Third Reich forces before and after D Day.
Napoleon BTW suffered a similar fate.
Mao used guerrilla/insurgent warfare successfully. Ho Chi Minh did the same with the North Vietnamese Army and its terror wing, the Viet Cong.
America used guerrilla warfare successfully to win our war of Independence.
There are other examples where insurgencies were defeated. The key to each defeat was cutting off the outside support. No insurgency has ever survived without substantial outside support, yet we have taken no substantial steps to stop the flow of terrorists and their weapons into Iraq from Syria and Iran. That is a major flaw in our military strategy. If we were not willing to do that from the outset we should never have taken the fight.
If we failed to give the potential unconventional aspects of warfare consideration, it proves my contention that we are only using conventional minded military leaders to make decisions. American officers trained in unconventional warfare always consider the sneaky, tricky and dirty parts of war.
The need for studying all aspects prior to combat was carefully described by a brilliant strategist -
"He who wishes to fight must first count the cost. When you engage in actual fighting, when victory is long in coming, then men’s weapons will grow dull and their ardor will be dampened. If you lay siege to a town, you will exhaust your strength. If the campaign is protracted, the resources of the state will not be equal to the strain. Now when your weapons are dulled, your ardor dampened, your strength exhausted and your treasure spent, other chieftains will spring up to take advantage of your extremity. Then no man, however wise, will be able to avert the consequences that must ensue…In war then let your great objective be victory, not lengthy campaigns."
Sun Tzu - The Art of War
This link provides a brief explanation of the war of the flea and how to manage it. The explanation in the book The War of The Flea is simple enough. Guerrillas who know their trade and have at least some significant popular support cannot be defeated by means available to most governments.
The explanation seems to baffle most conventional military men who believe with every bone in their body that might (a bigger sword) can always overcome ideas.
findarticles.com |
