THE RULE OF CHOKE POINTS: Most systems, whether we are discussing computer networks, power grids or governmental decision making have built-in ” choke points” that act to self-regulate or rationalize the efficiency of the system as a whole. In terms of air travel, we have for example, airports like O’Hare in Chicago that serve as a major ” hub” with destinations radiating out like spokes on a wheel. The discussion of intelligence reform in the last few months showcased a different kind of choke point, ” the stovepipe” which centralizes and narrows many strands from different directions into one.
A System Perturbations attack that hits a choke point not only ensures systemic paralysis but makes certain that the effects of the attack are maximized to reach all the origin points that feed into the targeted choke point. This is a devastating attack but difficult to pull off. Not only does it require specialized systems knowledge but a fair amount of skill and luck. The Allies attempted to disable key, ” limiting factor”, German war industries like synthetic fuels and rubber production during WWII. But the subsequent Strategic Bombing Survey and Military Intelligence interviews with captured Nazis like Albert Speer revealed that German production actually increased each month up to the defeat of the Third Reich even as Allied bomber payloads grew heavier.
THE RULE OF REDUNDANCY: This rule is really quite simple. Systems that have built in layers of Redundancy are decentralized enough to shrug off Systems Perturbation attacks by bypassing localized damage. The internet you are reading this blog post on was made possible originally by DoD scientists seeking to prevent a Soviet nuclear first strike from destroying our defense computer communications. Redundancy needs to be built into all our financial and communication networks on a global scale so there is no ” central ” target presented to would be attackers.
THE RULE OF DIMINISHING RETURNS: In terms of both offense and defense when dealing with systems level operations the initial investment yields the greatest return. September 11 cost al Qaida roughly $ 500,000 to pull off yet caused enormous damage to the world economy. Attempting to defend every vulnerable point is particularly wasteful and self-defeating. The entire system has to be retooled to resist System Perturbations, not merely guarded.
These rules represent a modest beginning in terms of looking at the strategic implications of System Perturbations but the greater the degree to which globalization advances the more validity such principles are apt to have in warfare.
Page 2 of 2 | Previous page
nemesisenforcer:
September 19th, 2004 at 5:47 am
I started thinking about these kind of concepts some time ago after reading the works of Alvin Toffler. After the first Gulf War, he made the observation that ours was a 3rd wave army fighting a 2nd wave army and the results were obvious. However, he was wrong on one count. He hypothesized that in the future the contest would not be so one-sided and that the fight would be more equal. I disagreed. I felt that it wouldn’t be between more and less advanced 3rd wave armies, but between 3rd wave and 1st wave societies. I never knew why I believed this, but the concepts of the Core and the Gap highlight my conclusions (which were reached probably as a matter of pure luck and chance) beautifully.
mark:
September 19th, 2004 at 1:43 pm
Was the Toffler statement from _War and Anti-War_ or the slim _New Civilization_ book ? Or an interview ? In any case Alvin Toffler is someone whose ideas have a lot of resonance with me too.
Nemesis. wrote:
“However, he was wrong on one count. He hypothesized that in the future the contest would not be so one-sided and that the fight would be more equal. I disagreed. I felt that it wouldn’t be between more and less advanced 3rd wave armies, but between 3rd wave and 1st wave societies.”
Good call. That contest is also the end of the old Geneva Convention rule set ( not that most of these regimes adhered to Geneva even when fighting opponents on their own level) because when facing lopsided odds opponents of the United States will seek to change the rules in their favor.
Some of our European friends will support them too by trying to impose highly restrictive police model rules on U.S. forces while giving our unconventional foes a blank check to commit war crimes. This is their version of Containment ( or more accurately, Cordon Sanitaire)since it is less important to Berlin and Paris that their own states advance than the gap between American and European power not widen further.
nemesisenforcer:
September 20th, 2004 at 5:23 am
Yes, it was War and Anti-War that I pulled that synopsis from. I like your analysis of the Europeans’ motives and actions. Makes a lot of sense.
Editor Choice:
October 15th, 2005 at 4:30 am
Excellent and original blog. I will comeback.
Here an interesting site regarding: Chicago travel: Best prices at Chicago travel, best in travel industry in Chicago have great deals in travel industry on hotels, flights, Chicago tours, Concerts, Sports Tickets, Restaurants, sight seeing in Chicago and much more. Has an impressive guide on Chicago, for your visit to Chicago, to provide useful travel information, hints and tips.