Origins of SHOCK AND AWE

by chachasmum 25 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  chachasmum

  The basis of Hitler's blitzkrieg, March 14, 2003
  

  Reviewer: A reader from Langley, VA, United States

  Shock And Awe were the foundational concepts put forth by Hitler's military leaders as a new and lethal way of rapidly overwhelming opponents. Setting aside considerations of the violence visited on civilians and non-combatants or the damage done to infrastructure, Hitler suggested that inducing "shock and awe" through his "lightning war" system would lead to rapid military victories. WWII showed that, at least at the level of individual battles, he was right. The authors suggest this is a powerful strategy for any nation that wants to absolutely and rapidly overwhelm its opponents, and doesn't much care who gets killed in the process. Interesting reading, although it rambles a bit and blitzkrieg is often misspelled. Good instruction to any military that wants to undertake fascistic extranational adventures.
  

  If this is accurate i find it truly repulsive. Using strategy of one of the most evil men that ever walked the face of the earth. If our leaders are doing this in the name of democracy it is a sad day for America.
• 

  Gopher

  To me, it is not the method (blitzkrieg/shock & awe) that defines the morality of the warring nation. Rather, what is it using "blitzkrieg" to accomplish?

  Hitler was using it to try to support his totalitarianism and world domination. He was using it as part of his method to suppress freedom. And he used blitzkrieg or carpet bombing not just military targets but entire cities and their populace and their architecture. It was used for domination.

  The American's methods are not used for totalitarianism and world domination, despite the views of Arabic nations to the contrary. The American/British coalition is targetting military installations and trying (as far as humanly possible) to avoid civilian casualties. If they could have taken out just the Iraqi leadership with no other activity, the coalition likely would have felt it did its job.

  Not Hitler. He wanted all people subject to his terroristic Third Reich.

  There is a large difference. I do not understand why a certain method of seeking to induce fear (mainly into the corrupt military and political structure of an enemy nation) has anything at all to do with what happened in World War II.

  Any similiarity is purely coincidental.
• 

  chachasmum

  I don't care about the different motives for using it. I still think it's repulsive
• 

  Sargon

  To attempt to win a war quickly is not repulsive. The term 'shock and awe' was never used by any one in the third Reich. What was repulsive was the deeds done behind the front lines. The majority of the soldiers in the German army were good honourable people, blitzkreig was an effective military policy. The majority of the atrocities were performed by the SS well behind the front lines. Most good military commanders learn tactics by studying successful engagements in history. I see nothing repulsive in this.
• 

  Navigator

  Chachasmum

  It should be obvious to you by now that the U.S. military cares a great deal about "who gets killed". Are you not aware that only precision weapons are being used in Bhagdad? There is nothing immoral about trying to win quickly. Sargon and Gopher are correct. Motives and objectives are very important.
• 

  chachasmum

  Sargon

  The majority of the soliders in the army were good..........You have got to be kidding!!! Yeah they murdered over six million human beings and that was not just the SS.
• 

  chachasmum

  Navigator

  Those weapons go astray as we have seen time and again so they are not as precision as they would have us believe. Tell that to the innocent lives that have been lost. If they cared they would not be dropping bombs in the first place. They would have found another solution. Bush wanted war he had no intention of allowing other methods. Hitler once coined a phrase " How fortunate for us in power that the masses do not think"
• 

  hurt

  Quote:

  "Shock And Awe were the foundational concepts put forth by Hitler's military leaders as a new and lethal way of rapidly overwhelming opponents. Setting aside considerations of the violence visited on civilians and non-combatants or the damage done to infrastructure, Hitler suggested that inducing "shock and awe" through his "lightning war" system would lead to rapid military victories. WWII showed that, at least at the level of individual battles, he was right. The authors suggest this is a powerful strategy for any nation that wants to absolutely and rapidly overwhelm its opponents, and doesn't much care who gets killed in the process. Interesting reading, although it rambles a bit and blitzkrieg is often misspelled. Good instruction to any military that wants to undertake fascistic extranational adventures."

  ***This would only make some sense if a fair tranlation of any of Hitler's wars would throw up the above words, elsewise, the writer would only be fishing. Military tactics can be the same, there's no real problem with that. The same methods might work over time, and get repeated by different armies. What is at issue here, I perceive, is the use of the same words used by one of history's vilest rulers. I would give the US administration the benefit of the doubt, but given their love of catchy captions, who knows. The writer would do a lot of good if (s)he could come up with references to Hitler, or any of his men, who used the expression "Shock and Awe", not simply as a military strategy, but as a descrition of what they'll do.
• 

  truthseeker1

  Hitler shaved his beard and also had a mustache, does that mean we can't shave our beards or grow a mustache?

  Or more in line with your arguement, he developed a free way system to rapidly transport troops and (I believe) developed the first Jet propelled plane. Does this me we shouldn't use jet engines on planes or transport troops on freeways?
• 

  amac

  "Shock and Awe" came from a study written by 3 retired US military commanders back in 1996 called Shock and Awe: Achieving Rapid Dominance. Although the idea may have been used in warfare prior to this, the term was coined in this study. One of the writers was a member of The Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, so I doubt it had too much to do with Hitler.