JOURNAL: LTC John Nagl on Jon Stewart

Counterinsurgency goes mainstream. Here's the link to the interview. He does a great job. It was also effective in that it drove sales of the Counterinsurgency Field Manual to the top 100 on Amazon.

NOTE: Wow, the Petraeus information operations media machine is amazing (and this is a great example). Nod of respect to the masterful way in which the Petraeus team has been able to influence the public's perception of this war -- the essence of which was a shift towards marketing the military leadership in Iraq as both competent and brilliant.

Comments

[Cavolonero]

I thought it was interesting that in his forward to the COIN manual, Nagl, he's quoting someone else but ~ " ... we purged ourselves of everything that had to do with irregular warfare or insurgency, because it had to do with how we lost that war ... "

Then on the same page even ~ " ... a field manual on the subject of counterinsurgency for more than twenty years, since the wake of the El Salvador campaign. "

[gmoke]

"Be polite. Be professional. Be prepared to kill."

That sound byte and Stewart's response to it were important to show on TV, even basic cable.

[Capt. Harold]

The enemy/terrorists has a vote…adaptive, outthink, it is difficult! Thinking mans warfare. Haven’t heard President Bush talk about the enemy/terrorist like that before
I guess finally someone found out that winning a war is not only about destroying targets. The enemy has a vote and winning is not a certainty.

[Jeffery]

And now for something completely different....

Is anyone having difficulty viewing the video of the Nagel interview?

Try as I might, I cannot get this thing to work, although videos from sites other than Comedy Central run just fine.

[Jeffery]

I saw the Nagl interview, What the big deal? "be polite, be professional, be prepared to kill"? Is the issue about books sales?

What is so amazing about the Petraeus information operations media machine? How is the Nagl interview an example of this amazing machine? In what way has the Petraeus been able to influence the public's perception of the war and to what end? How has the Petraeus team successfully marketed military leadership and, and again to what end? If I don't get "it" how is it that the average American does?

bytheway John the preview button doesn't work either.

[NietzschesGhost]

Jeffery:

I think the biggest difference between Petraeus' and former commanders' approach is that Petraeus seems to understand the importance of information warfare - specifically propaganda. By sending Nagl onto what is generally considered a "left-wing" national broadcast, he's trying to gain control of the military's public image. It's saying "We're not doing Abu Ghuriab any more. We may be stuck here, but we're going to be professional about it."

It's no coincidence that Nagl was the one allowed to appear on the show. Since he quite literally "wrote the book" on CI, and he's professional, articulate and civilized, it leads the viewer to believe that the CI manual (and by extension, the people who follow it) are also professional, articulate and civilized.

When a conflict is being framed as idealogical and moral, it is important to maintain the appearance of moral superiority, lest the public lose it's will to support the conflict. Petraeus "gets" this, and is obviously trying to improve that public image.

Now, I wouldn't necessarily characterize the strategy as "brilliant", however. Rather, I would characterize it as a "bare minimum required level of competence". In other words, successful propaganda management should be a basic part of any commander's training. Petraeus' "brilliance" in this matter is only evident through the distinct *lack* of brilliance in his predecessors.

But that's just my opinion.