Lucky wrote: > What I fail to understand is where the news are in this article. Yes, > the US government, as all governments, is engaging in disinformation, > deception, and lies. It is called PSYOPS. And yes, PSYOPS has been > conducted and will continue to be conducted against both friendly and > hostile foreign nations in addition to the country's own citizens. > > So where is the news? Is it that the government is admitting to this > well-known fact? > > Wondering, > --Lucky
Perception management. Japan's "Asia for the Asiatics" propaganda was a sign of military expansion, and was totally ignored by allied powers -- to our great loss -- and surprise. In most countries, they just walked in (hell, they walked over France). In the 40s and 50s, we also had Comintern agents agitating Asian populations against the West. Warning signals were all over the place, and we flat-out failed to see the significance, due to American notions of conflict. Several far-sighted military commentators of the 40s-50s, which had embraced guerrilla-political tactics, pointed to Asian attitudes (and even the India-Pakistan conflict) as holding the key to the Middle East for the U.S.S.R., and stressed that we needed to undertake a perceptual offensive to combat anti-Western agitprop. I have a axis map of 1950 here, hypothesizing conflict and guerrilla bases in Asia as auxiliary forces to augment the technical inferiority of the U.S.S.R. -- it is rather spooky, as it mirrors today's map, with China as a new player. Certainly, the author did not foresee the possibility of today's terrorism, with world-wide range, or it's possible use as an auxiliary (or even decisive force in being), but it fits nicely with the that line of thinking. So, something like the Office Of Strategic Influence, has been called for, in strength, for 50 years. These calls for change were ignored and not supported by the military, who rarely considered populations as incipient forces in being. We made the same mistake in WW II, by failing to cultivate a climate receptive to resistance. Indeed, to a large extent, we relied on communists (like Tito) to fight -- a deal with the Devil in many countries, because Britain was fighting for survival. Had we seeded ideas beforehand and understood the political climate, we would have fought from a position of strength, and minimized the rise of post-war communist influence and civil wars. One of the great strengths of Comintern - HUMINT. They got there first. In WW II, the British Royal Air Force did not want to "dirty itself" with the SOE, even if it cost them their country. The idea of dropping in civvies-dressed saboteurs, was just not gentlemanly for Sandhurst men. It was "deceptive and unethical." Had the SOE received more support, and seeded stay-behind resistance, the SOE and the OSS would have likely deterred invasions -- saving millions of lives. There was even resistance to "coastwatcher" programs, which ended up playing a major role in the war. (Todays "coasts" : American corporations.) If Wingate's "long range penetration" (ala terrorism) is a new game, along with Anti-Western agitation, this is an important defensive measure. We are looking at a situation not unlike the 1940s, which Japan took advantage of via a series of greased invasions. Other countries could do the same thing in the future. Colonial arrogance refused to see the power in the peasant, or in small power-brokers. IMO, OSI is more about recognition, than deception. Our "gentlemanly" notions of conflict and fair-play, together with Western arrogance -- nearly lost us Europe, laid the foundations for Vietnam, and terms like "mutually assured destruction." We ignored the people -- seeing only traditional military force -- a orientation that continued throughout the Cold War. So, I'd say the Pentagon just got a major clue. One that is at least 50 years overdue, and places us about a century behind some of our adversaries. ~Aimee
