Re: The Precision Revolution

Have the terrorists won the precision revolution? From a technological standpoint, no. To apply Helen Hunt's quote from Twister to our smart bombs, "You've never seen it miss this house, and miss that house and then come after you!" Our ability to take out a target with minimal collateral damage is unparalleled. The problem is finding the target and taking it out within the window of opportunity. This requires good intelligence, especially human intelligence, and efficient communication. Right now, we can verify targets in something like twelve minutes, which is pretty doggone good. The problem is that we need better sources, and we need to be even faster in order to take full advantage of this precision, which will undoubtedly only grow as time passes.

I will agree that for the time being, we are also too concerned about collateral damage and the bad press that comes from it. This is war, and mistakes will be made inevitably. We cannot be so concerned about this that it limits our ability to take action against those who, frankly, need to be killed. Ultimately, while we should not deliberately target civilians, the concern that trumps all others is winning, including concerns about collateral damage and unintended civilian casualties. What's more, we need to proceed under the premise that any civilian population/facility being used by terrorists is made a legitimate military target by their presence in that population/facility.

Fortunately for the United States (along with Israel), she has never ratified Protocol 1 to the Geneva Conventions from 8 June 1977, so her hands are not tied in the same way as other nations when dealing with terrorists (see Article 44 esp.). We can take out terrorists any time, anywhere without legal ramifications, and we need to take full advantage of this to limit the advantages to waging asymmetric warfare.

Incidentally, asymmetric warfare didn't do the NVA and Viet Cong a whole heck of a lot of good. Granted, they fared better than they did in a straight up fight, but it was public discontent at home as opposed to Communist military genius that led to our defeat there. NVA General Giap has said as much. Plus, if you look at casualty figures, the NVA and Viet Cong suffered something like 2 million killed as compared with our 50,000. There was no way we should have lost that war. Even if we had only continued to provide air support for South Vietnam it may at least have remained free instead of under the Communist tyranny under which it currently resides.