NOVEMBER 9, 2011 2:51PM

Those who fail to learn their history...

Rate: 0 Flag

From FM-34, the United States Army and Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Field Manual:

During Napoleon’s occupation of Spain in 1808, it seems little thought was given to the potential challenges of subduing the Spanish populace. Conditioned by the decisive victories at Austerlitz and Jena, Napoleon believed the conquest of Spain would be little more than a “military promenade.” Napoleon’s campaign included a rapid conventional military victory but ignored the immediate requirement to provide a stable environment for the populace. The French failed to analyze the Spanish people, their history, culture, motivations, and potential to support or hinder the achievement of French political objectives. The Spanish people were accustomed to hardship, suspicious of foreigners and constantly involved in skirmishes with security forces. Napoleon’s cultural miscalculation resulted in a protracted occupation struggle that lasted nearly six years and ultimately required approximately three-fifths of the Empire’s total armed strength, almost four times the force of 80,000 Napoleon originally designated.

The Spanish resistance drained the resources of the French Empire. It was the beginning of the end for Napoleon. At the theater level, a complete understanding of the problem and a campaign design that allowed the counterinsurgency force to learn and adapt was lacking.

Doesn't Napoleon's predicament sound familiar?

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
yes, indeed. unfortunately, napolean's empire was dependent on napoleon, while the american empire more resembles rome: near endless resources and not much dependent on the current emperor.

so it will take long time for the empire to react, and each successive emperor will imagine he is more capable of turning things around.

obama has at least added a new element to the mix: killing at a distance without risk to americans has great appeal to politicians. the resulting stored up hatred will be 'someone else's problem.'
@al loomis - There was a New Yorker article a while back about drones, and someone from the military made the distinction of their use as a tactic in contrast to using it as a strategy. Using it as an accepted strategy effectively means that we can use our military option rather than diplomacy and not risk skin in the game. The real threat to our society is what kind of people will we become? Killing from on high while you yourself remain impervious was what the Greek gods enjoyed -- and we all know what kind of assholes they could be.

Mario Diana's Favorites

  1. facewall Joan Walsh

view all

Updates

  1. Joan Walsh

    Me on Open Salon