BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?

Subject: BS: Shock and Awe?
From: Peter Woodruff
Date: 20 Mar 03 - 07:55 PM

What are the talking heads in th media talking about when they talk about "shock and awe?"

Peter Woodruff

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: NicoleC
Date: 20 Mar 03 - 08:05 PM

The Pentagon's name for a plan to dump 3000 bombs on Baghdad in the first 48 hours.

They aren't, as yet, following it.

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Mar 03 - 08:06 PM

The previously announced concept of the USA & Britain launching such an incredible barrage of several thousand cruise missile and bombs in a mere few days, that it would induce shock and awe in the Iraquis and cause them to mostly surrender, rather than resisting the invasion of Iraq.

This suggestion was made by various US figures to the worldwide press in the last few days (or weeks?) before the first official attacks following Bushe's deadline expiring. It remains to be seen whether they will actually do it or not.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Mar 03 - 08:12 PM

But there could still be a quote lying behind the choice of those words. Maybe some kind of bizarre pun on Chocinaw?

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Peter Woodruff
Date: 20 Mar 03 - 08:12 PM

So, the US government hasn't done the "Shock and Awe" thing yet? That is a good thing.

Peter Woodruff

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Mar 03 - 08:30 PM

It certainly won't be when Bush drops his pants...

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Peter Woodruff
Date: 20 Mar 03 - 08:32 PM

Ha Ha Ha!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: michaelr
Date: 20 Mar 03 - 08:39 PM

What's chocinaw?

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Peter Woodruff
Date: 20 Mar 03 - 08:45 PM

Yeah! What's Chocinaw?

Peter Woodruff

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: GUEST,Dreaded Guest
Date: 20 Mar 03 - 08:47 PM

Many expect the Pentagon to test new weapons against the Iraqis. The below is from House Resolution 2977, which did not pass during the last session of the U.S. congress. But it talks about various weapons. I expect the Pentagon...while they're distracting the world with conventional bombing...is going to microwave babies and drive people to suicide while experimenting with some of these new gadgets. Certainly shocks the hell out of me. I heard radio mouthpieces actually laughing about this criminal war today. And look at the weapons that'll be tested. Once they're fine-tuned, they'll be used against the rest of us, if they're not already:

2)(A) The terms `weapon' and `weapons system' mean a device capable of any of the following:
(i) Damaging or destroying an object (whether in outer space, in the atmosphere, or on earth) by--
(I) firing one or more projectiles to collide with that object;
(II) detonating one or more explosive devices in close proximity to that object;
(III) directing a source of energy (including molecular or atomic energy, subatomic particle beams, electromagnetic radiation, plasma, or extremely low frequency (ELF) or ultra low frequency (ULF) energy radiation) against that object; or
(IV) any other unacknowledged or as yet undeveloped means.
(ii) Inflicting death or injury on, or damaging or destroying, a person (or the biological life, bodily health, mental health, or physical and economic well-being of a person)--
(I) through the use of any of the means described in clause (i) or subparagraph (B);
(II) through the use of land-based, sea-based, or space-based systems using radiation, electromagnetic, psychotronic, sonic, laser, or other energies directed at individual persons or targeted populations for the purpose of information war, mood management, or mind control of such persons or populations; or
(III) by expelling chemical or biological agents in the vicinity of a person.
(B) Such terms include exotic weapons systems such as--
(i) electronic, psychotronic, or information weapons;
(ii) chemtrails;
(iii) high altitude ultra low frequency weapons systems;
(iv) plasma, electromagnetic, sonic, or ultrasonic weapons;
(v) laser weapons systems;
(vi) strategic, theater, tactical, or extraterrestrial weapons; and
(vii) chemical, biological, environmental, climate, or tectonic weapons.
(C) The term `exotic weapons systems' includes weapons designed to damage space or natural ecosystems (such as the ionosphere and upper atmosphere) or climate, weather, and tectonic systems with the purpose of inducing damage or destruction upon a target population or region on earth or in space.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2001/hr2977.html

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Mar 03 - 08:57 PM

Nice summation of the possible devices that could be used by criminals in high places...

Contrast this with the following statistics:

The USA spends 50% of all annual weapons expenditures on Planet Earth.

10% of the USA annual military budget, if properly allocated, could provide everyone on the planet with an adequate annual basic standard of living, such that they could live a decent life.

10 per cent.

Once people have an adequate standard of living, they tend to become better educated, practice birth control more effectively, and have smaller families. Their families tend to be more stable. Crime goes way down.

Makes you wonder why it hasn't been tried by the greedy few at the top, doesn't it?

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 20 Mar 03 - 10:40 PM

Because that 10% goes into the pockets of the greedy few at the top, LH, do the math! (But your point is well taken.)

Damned depressing, isn't it? People actually could live comfortable lives in their own lands. Full bellies are a lot less likely to resort to some of the political and environmental disasters we've seen in the last 100 years in the world.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Mar 03 - 10:55 PM

Yup. As soon as people have a little security, grace, and leisure time in their lives they start to appreciate things like a beautiful forest or a herd of gazelle, and they will take measures to protect them. But when they're desperate and starving they just cut it all down or kill it.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Mar 03 - 10:59 PM

You see, Boss Hog thinks that if he gives you a little you'll want it all. Why would anyone think like that? Hmmmmmm?

So just in case, Boss Hog keeps a little "shock and awe" right here at home fir us niggas on his assembly lines.

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Troll
Date: 20 Mar 03 - 11:28 PM

Why doesn't the rest of the world take 10% of their 50% and do the same thing? Why should it be the job of the US to take the rest of the world to raise? Because our people have worked like hell for several centuries to get where we are now, why do we now owe the world a living?
Please don't drag out that old tired socialist crap again about exploitation of the rest of the world. We have no colonies. We pay for what we take and often that trade is the only damn money the other country gets other than foreign aid. The US hands out plenty of that and likely as not the recipients turn around and burn our flag and tell us how much they hate us. That hatred is usually based on envy for what we have.
No one gives the US aid. We have a good life and we have earned it through hard work. Yes, our government occasionally makes mistakes and those mistakes are continually thrown in our faces by the envious world. But let 'em get in trouble, and they yell for the US to bail them out.
Now go ahead and pick my post apart and tell us all how horrible the US is. Just remember, if it wasn't for American know-how and financing, this forum probably would not exist.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Mar 03 - 11:43 PM

Het, troll, ain;t nuthin' wrong with the US. Just its people. So we work hard? Hmmmmmm? I don't think so. I have two emplyees, one from the Ukraine and one from El Salvidore. They *used* to work hard until they came the US.

No, what we have going for us is that, when push come to shove, we're some purdy mean some-biches. We done killed off the folks who lived here before us. We killed off Mexicans who were in our way in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California.

We killed off folks in the Caribean in the Spainish American War. We killed off Germans and Japenese and Koreans and Vietnamese and Somolians and Checz and, and, and the beat goes on...

One shouldn't eguate our thirst for killing off other folks with us being some wonderful, loving nation.

Bottom line, the US has killed off more folks in its brief relative history than any other country in history...

What's wrong with this picture?

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Barry Finn
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 12:46 AM

Just 'cause we have it all & can keep it all to ourselves, just 'cause we can prevent some disease infested nation from living so's that we can make a profit off the dying, just 'cause we have the sway & swagger to twist & the arms & necks of all the little shits in our world & do, just 'cause we can do as we please with out fear of world opinion or world courts 'cause we can make both obsolete, just 'cause 10% of the left over crumbs is to much in our eyes for others to have & we can just as easily takes out their eyes as we can just charge 'em dearly for cake & do, just 'cause the dying dirty beggers that knock on our shore & ask only for a piece of bread & blanket & can't pay for it, just 'cause we can do & do, do, doesn't give the rest of the kids on the block reason to not love us for what we are. Just 'cause we don't have't pay for anything we want doesn't mean that anyone else can unless they first pay us though the nose for the priviledge of trying to buy up something that we can cheat them out of doesn't make them poor & stupid it just makes us hard working god fearing crafty ol horse tradders. Just 'cause we can't understand these things & won't fix any of these things doesn't mean we're mean it only means that it's the rest of the neighborhood who has't bow down to kiss our asses in order to join our country club. Just don't hate me 'cause we're the be all (we can) to beat all (we can) 'cause if you do & you don't love us as we think you should we'll decapate yours & everybody else's little sorry stinking asses & toss you all aside like yesterday's used up left over's. So you all get with our program, 'cause if you're not with us you're against us & we don't want to tell you what that means? We don't want to shock & awe you right back into the middle ages. Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Grab
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 08:44 AM

Troll, if the US gov wants to be the global policeman then fine, no-one really has a problem with that.

However, policemen are only allowed to enforce the law of the land. The are responsible for enforcing these laws without favouritism. They have superiors who can observer their conduct and fire them or punish them if they themselves break the law. They can't duck out when it gets too tough. The laws are specified by representatives of the people on whom the laws are enforced, and the policemen are employed (directly or indirectly) by those representatives, so the policemen in the end have to be able to justify what they do to the people. And the policemen are only responsible for catching criminals, the criminals are later tried by judge/jury, using evidence which the police must make public.

Then we look at the US situation. The US is not acting to enforce international law, or to enforce UN resolutions. The US is also ignoring existing UN resolutions by trading with countries that engage in or sponsor terrorism (Israel) or which routinely conduct human rights abuses against their citizens (China), and is victimising countries with whom they do not agree (Cuba). When peacekeeping has become too hard, they've buggered off home and left the country to it (Somalia). The current President has said explicitly that he doesn't have to justify his behaviour to anyone except to the people of the US - no other countries have any input into the actions of the US, so the rest of the world has no say in the "policing". And finally the US has actively opposed the setting up of an international court to try war crimes (they will not even let servicemen be tried for rape and murder in Okinawa), and has never revealed its reasons for suspecting Bin Laden or Hussein of involvement in 9/11.

If the US wants to take the "global policeman" thing seriously, then fine. However without the US acting to any international norms, and without the rest of the world having any say in the policing, this is just the actions of the biggest bully on the block. The comparison of England in 1776 and US in 2003 is overwhelming.

As you say, no-one gives the US aid. Unfortunately the US (government) doesn't give aid to many other folks either, only to the ones whose governments it likes, and not on any humanitarian grounds. It only paid some of its back-dues to the UN on threat of being expelled from the UN! The US gives less aid as a percentage of GDP than any other industrial nation, and on an absolute basis has only just this year become the largest aid-giver because they gave large donations to Pakistan after 9/11.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 02:55 PM

"We have no colonies." The USA is itself one enormous colony.

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Metchosin
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 03:25 PM

as Henry Kissinger once said, the US doesn't have any friends, only interests......now there's an honest man.

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Beccy
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 03:35 PM

Has anyone else noticed that the words "Shock and Awe" fit surprisingly well into the tune "Get a Job"? Unfortunately, my dear hubbie noticed it last night after hearing the talking heads shout "Shock and Awe" for about the two bazillionth time and we've both had it going through our heads ever since.

Beccy

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Beccy
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 03:57 PM

McGrath- You said, "The USA is itself one enormous colony."

Please expound...

Beccy

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: GUEST,Mars
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 04:14 PM

Troll, that was an excellent post.

All the rest of you whiny pantywaist crybabies are going to eat your words when you see the Iraqi people dancing in the streets. Hussein is a Sunni, most of Iraq is Shi'ite, and guess what? They don't want him there either!

Bobert, don't you work hard? Or do you sit around on your nary Wes Ginny ass all day? I'm sure your employees are happy not to have to work 12-hour days of manual labor just to survive. Isn't that why they came to America in the first place?

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: NicoleC
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 04:28 PM

Of course the Iraqis are going to celebrate. Peace protestors should be aware that it's going to happen, make to mistake about it. And of course, those who perpetuated the slaughter will take credit for it.

The killing will have stopped; the survivors will be happy to be alive and there will be a huge sign of relief. You know -- the "Shock and Awe" bombing of Baghdad going on today, with little American flags like bows on Chirstmas gifts on every one of those bombs.

For the past 12 years they've been suffering under sanctions imposed from outside, despite the clear fact these sanctions have utterly failed to harm Saddam and have instead caused huge amounts of suffering, medical deprivation and hunger for the average citizen. Anything which ends that is going to be cause for celebration.

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Peter Woodruff
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 04:46 PM

I watched this afternoon in shock and awe as the United States wasted the west side of th Euphrates Riverin Baghdad.

Peter Woodruff

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Peter Woodruff
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 04:49 PM

I hope when we finally develope that Startrek beam-me-up, it doesn't work like the internet.

Peter

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Beccy
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 04:52 PM

I'm with ya on the Star Trek reference, Peter. What I REALLY want is that nifty hand-held body scanner that diagnoses/cures you of what ails you. THAT would be cool!

Beccy

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Kim C
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 05:05 PM

Saddam could have stopped those sanctions at any time, if he gave a flying flip about the people in his country.

Anyway I have never been a fan of sanctions, specifically because they don't hurt the leaders, just the people.

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 05:07 PM

'You said, "The USA is itself one enormous colony." Please expound...Beccy'

Fair enough. A colony is what you have when people from one part of the world go to another part of the world and take it over and treat it as their place. That's what I meant about the USA being one enormous colony.

In a sense of course that's true of everywhere, but it all happened many hundred or even thousands of years in many places, and it's ancient history or even mythology.

I didn't mean it as a particular criticism - it's just that when people say things like "the USA doesn't have any colonies" or "there is no Empire" they sometimes seem to forget that the real difference from other countries is that the colonies and the empire weren't oceans away, but contiguous, which meant that rather than moving towards independence they moved towards integration. Similar to the situation with Russia really.

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Kim C
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 05:22 PM

Well, we do have territories. Lots of other countries do, not just us.

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Beccy
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 05:54 PM

That's why I didn't pounce, McGrath. I was sure you had a perfectly reasonable explanation.

Beccy

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 06:20 PM

and I thought it was a folk-processing of "Aw Shucks!"

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 06:27 PM

"What's Chocinaw?"

It's a county in Georgia. Maybe the lad who wrote the book came from there, and thought he'd make a meaningless private joke or something?

Anyway, it seems a strangely ugly phrase to say out loud, appropriately enough.

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: DougR
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 06:42 PM

Troll: excellent post at 11:28 P.M., but you failed to point out in the following statement something that certainly could have been added. The statement: "Yes, our government occasionally makes mistakes and those mistakes are continually thrown in our faces by the envious world." The envious world obviously has a lot of help from people like those on the Mudcat who think the U. S. can do nothing right, and is responsible for all of the ills of the world.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 07:46 PM

Not so. I also think Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Israel, the U.K., France, Germany, Japan, Syria, Saddam, the major banks, and my mother's dog are responsible for a number of the ills of the world.

And that's just a start...

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Mar 03 - 09:32 PM

The following is from a BBC report and helps clarify the origin of the term. The views expressed are those of the author and his sources.

rich r

"The doctrine of "shock and awe" is based on a book by military strategist Harlan Ullman, who is admired by both Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Colin Powell.

Mr Ullman wrote that the use of air power to achieve "nearly incomprehensible levels of mass destruction" could achieve "an overwhelming level of shock and awe against an adversary on an immediate basis to paralyse its will to resist".

It is a belief that is deeply held by the US military, who were among the first advocates of strategic air power.

They applied it to the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki which ended World War II.

And it was deeply held by the first advocates of air power in the early 20th Century, including early British and Italian military theorists like Sir Hugh Trenchard and Giuilo Douhet who believed that civilian morale would collapse with the first air strikes on cities.

However, many US supporters of air power have called for precision bombing which would not be aimed directly against civilians but only military and industrial targets.

Mr Ullman argues that with modern precision weapons, a "non-nuclear equivalent" of Hiroshima could be created.

The use of these sophisticated weapons, precisely targeted by global positioning satellites, is designed to maximise their effects while limiting collateral damage, which would make the task of post-war reconstruction more difficult.

Mr Rumsfeld said that there was no comparison between the air war in World War II, where "dumb weapons were widely distributed across large areas," and the precise targeting employed now to ensure that military targets and the leaders of the regime were precisely attacked without harming the Iraqi people.

Uncertain effects

The US military hopes, that with the Iraqi Government under attack and unable to communicate with its troops, the fear of further massive attack will lead to a collapse of the regime and widespread surrender.

But history shows that air campaigns will only work if morale is already undermined.

At the beginning of World War II, the Germans helped insure a rapid surrender of the Netherlands by the terror bombing of Rotterdam, but the German attacks on London and other cities in the Blitz hardened British resistance.

And in Vietnam, large scale bombing also seemed to have little effect on enemy morale.

But US officials believe that there is no widespread support for Saddam Hussein's regime, and that they have already gained the psychological advantage over their enemy. "

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: gnu
Date: 22 Mar 03 - 07:20 AM

Don't know if anyone reported this earlier but, according to my brother, the real shock and awe will come soon when Starlifters and Galaxies pickup all that snow in Colorado and dump it on Baghdad.

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Mar 03 - 11:14 AM

Yup, that would probably do the trick...

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 22 Mar 03 - 11:31 PM

Some of that "Shock and Awe" has gone awry, it appears. Iraqi soldiers trying to surrender and British journalists they were following were all hit by allied tanks.

Here's the article.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: katlaughing
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 12:14 AM

Shit! Thanks for the article link, SRS. More senseless waste!

Subject: RE: BS: Shock and Awe? Media reference?
From: Kaleea
Date: 23 Mar 03 - 12:32 AM

Geez, Guest beat me to the punch--I was just gonna tell ya that "Shock and Awe" was a book telling how to smoke out the bad guys--which we never did actually get around to in 'Nam. Wasn't it published back in the 60's? Or am I having a "gray moment" again? I thought I remembered some of my older cousins arguing about the ideas put forth in the book way back during "Nam," one of them having been over there & the other just went out & got braces for his teeth so he didn't have to go.