Irregular warfare

Irregular warfare is defined as a military force that is guerilla or asymmetric in nature. An enemy that has based his doctrine around irregular warfare can be a challenging adversary to any Marine Corps unit. In order to prepare their Marines for Irregular Warfare, small unit leaders and Staff Non-Commissioned Officers must train their platoons in a realistic manner by holding high technical standards, synthesizing exhausting scenarios and creating frictional environments. Staff Non-Commissioned

Irregular warfare has become the centre of much military and academic study in recent years, due mostly to the ongoing NATO operations in Afghanistan. However irregular warfare is by no means a recent revelation in the evolution of warfare and strategy, numerous examples exist throughout history in which irregular warfare tactics and strategy have been adopted and later analysed by academics and military professionals. This author will focus on the key issues that governments face in creating effective

Intro: Though conventional and irregular warfare (IW) are both forms of warfare with the desired objective of affecting the opposition’s government, the means by which they achieve that objective differ greatly. A major war against a near-peer competitor would likely place the Marine Corps against another military superpower. Preparation for such a conflict would ideally focus on tactics suited for a conventional military. Meanwhile, preparing for success against an irregular threat would conversely focus

Irregular warfare is an ever changing series of events with random approaches that differ from party to party. These tactics used by the enemy could be morally shocking, confusing, and seemly impossible to overcome when Marines are not prepared. There are several actions that a small unit leader is required or can take to prepare Marines for irregular warfare in future conflicts. Training Marines is by far the best action a small unit leader can take to develop the young Marines with the skills

can properly address non-traditional, or irregular wars. While the US maintains a capability to conduct conventional warfare, the preponderance of operations where the US military has been engaged since WWII have been irregular wars. Therefore, this question articulated by Douhet, as to understanding the character of the next war in order to properly plan, train, and equip, is certainly germane to the current discussion of regular war versus irregular war. In today’s fiscally constrained environment

Irregular Warfare against ISIS/ISIL Before I commence to identify some of the Irregular Warfare (IW) activities seen in this war against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS/ISIL), I would like to briefly define the term Irregular Warfare and describe what ISIS/ISIL really is. Irregular Warfare is described as a violent struggle among state and non-state actors for legitimacy and influence over the relevant population(s). Irregular Warfare is a deviation

There is a general discord among stakeholders on the definition of irregular warfare and where the term and concept fits within the joint and the individual services’ doctrine. The 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review report uses the term “irregular” only once in its one hundred and five pages and only in terms of a focus on building the joint force’s capability and capacity to deal with irregular warfare while maintaining a clear conventional and nuclear global superiority. Currently, the definition

amidst competing interests and threats. The U.S. military should prepare for both conventional and irregular warfare, while prioritizing conventional warfare, recognizing irregular warfare as the most significant short term threat to national interests and conventional warfare the most threatening in the long term. This paper will compare and contrast the considerations for these types of warfare, explain why the U.S. should prioritize conventional operations while preparing for both, and describe

Thucydides said that the three causes of war are fear, honor, and interest. It can be argued that this statement is just as true today as it was in Ancient Greece. With the fundamental nature of war remaining unchanged we can prepare for Irregular Warfare in much the same way we do any other conflict. The specifics of war will always change, and the Staff Non-Commissioned Officer will always have to adapt to this, but many common practices can still be used. Small unit leaders should prepare for

there have been over 80 irregular conflicts, including civil and guerrilla wars, rebellions or insurgencies. The United States has been involved in several of these conflicts, some of which are still ongoing, such as the conflict in Somalia. The conflict in Somalia, widely seen as unsuccessful, saw a significant change from the conventional mindset to one of irregular warfare. While threats from conventional forces still exist in today’s environment, irregular warfare has become a mainstay across