Strikes On Syria Are A Game Changer
Proceedings Magazine - May 2018
Captain David Allan Adams, U.S. Navy
(Retired)
U.S. and allied missile strikes on Syria’s chemical weapons infrastructure—at first glance—appeared symbolic and ineffectual. Critics were quick to point out that the strikes were ineffective and that “one night of airstrikes is not a substitute for a clear comprehensive Syria strategy.†Some notable experts claimed that the mission accomplished nothing because the attacks did “little to protect Syrian civilians from further atrocities at the hands of the Assad regime.â€
The truth is—as closer examination bears out—the strikes were a model for operational and strategic planners to emulate. Assessment of the strategic effectiveness of any military operation must start with an understanding that war—or the use of military force—as an instrument of policy is typically a much duller knife than renown strategist Carl von Clausewitz has led military thinkers to believe. It is easy to forget that in some previous military operations, the United States has used much more force to achieve much less, at significantly higher costs in the nation’s blood and treasure. U.S. forces have occupied capitols and overthrown regimes but still left the United States wanting in terms of long-term strategic success.
https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2018-05/strikes-syria-are-game-changer?utm_source=U.S.+Naval+Institute&utm_campaign=3732cbb736-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_1_11&
