An Effective Weapons Against Terrorists

Warrior-Mentor · 03-23-2006, 22:23

An effective weapon against terrorists: Ridicule
By Peter Schweizer

Is America taking terrorists too seriously? In the wake of continued threats, that might seem like a ridiculous question. But in terms of the psychology of the war on terrorism, it's a question that needs to be asked.

In a brilliant new white paper on public diplomacy, Michael Waller, the Walter and Leonore Annenberg chair in International Communication at The Institute of World Politics, makes a strong case for America's employing a new powerful weapon against the terrorists: ridicule.

"Ridicule raises morale at home. Ridicule strips the enemy/adversary of his mystique and prestige. Ridicule erodes the enemy's claim to justice. Ridicule eliminates the enemy's image of invincibility. Directed properly at an enemy, ridicule can be a fate worse than death," writes Waller.

History teaches that ridicule weakens the moral and political capital of our enemies. Ronald Reagan employed it with great effect during the Cold War. We all remember the "evil empire" speech, but what about the jokes? Two guys were standing in line at the vodka store. They were there for half an hour, then an hour, then an hour and a half. "I'm sick of this," one finally said. "I'm going over to the Kremlin to shoot (Mikhail) Gorbachev." The man left and returned about an hour later. "Well, did you shoot him?" "Heck no," he responded. "The line up there is a lot longer than this one."

Reagan a good model

Many of Reagan's comments reached the underground press in the Soviet Union, no doubt encouraging dissenters against communism. Reagan understood that sowing fear in the West was a potent weapon for Moscow. By laughing at communism, the spell of fear was broken. It was the same during World War II. A cartoon of Donald Duck mocking Hitler and Mein Kampf no doubt was demeaning to the Führer.

Thus far, the Bush administration's approach to fighting terrorists has been to demonize them. "Their vision of the world is dark and dim," President Bush said in January at Kansas State University. "They have got desires to spread a totalitarian empire." During his March 11 radio address, he said: "The enemy we face has proved to be brutal and relentless."

Certainly, their actions and goals warrant such treatment. But that alone is a tough strategy to maintain psychologically because it can be exhausting. As Waller writes: "Incessant, morbid portrayals of an individual, movement or mortal enemy might rally support for the American side, but they have a shelf-life that gets tired over time. Constant specters of unrelenting dangers risk sowing defeatism and chipping away at our own morale. Abroad, they risk making the U.S. look like a bully in some places and surrender the propaganda advantage to the other side."

Demonizing doesn't work

By continuing to demonize our enemies, we elevate their political status in the eyes of those disaffected souls in the developing world who dislike the United States.

I'm not suggesting that Bush start cracking Osama bin Laden jokes. And we should not mock Islam. Reagan joked about communist leaders but never about the Russian people. What the Bush administration can do is mock the terrorists.

For example, we should note that these self-professed warriors hide while they pay impoverished young men and women to become human bombs. We should play up Osama's privileged background. We should highlight the terrorists' ridiculous failures. The reality is that much like Soviet officials, terrorists are full of grand illusions about themselves and their mission.

The war on terror has military, political and economic dimensions. But it also has a critical psychological component. The terrorists are not 10 feet tall. We should engage in a psychological war that brings these thugs down to size.

Peter Schweizer is a research fellow at the Hoover Institution and author of Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy and Reagan's War.

Warrior-Mentor · 03-23-2006, 22:25

I'm for it.

Any PSYOP guys in the AO ready to incorporate this tactic?

**The Reaper** · 03-23-2006, 23:05

Didn't a soldier just get six months today for humiliating a terrorist?

TR

**Jack Moroney (RIP)** · 03-24-2006, 06:50

The perception of ridicule didn't do a whole lot for the Danes when they published the cartoons. I think you have to understand the target audience before you start playing mind games or showing your distane for them. Got to get inside their heads and push the right buttons. Push the wrong buttons and you become part of the problem. Your goal should be to destroy the myth that they are invincible but through demonstrated action that can be seen and understood by the target audience and those that they wish to influence in a manner that shows without any doubt that their stated beliefs and actions have led to this particular failure. It is all about perception and in a target audience who has been cultured from day one to believe that their role is right and guided by their god it becomes reality until it is demonstrated that perhaps their god is not on their side. Western media and statements from the "infidels" without being backed up by actions understood and accepted by the target audience as failures in their effort or system only provides fodder for their psyop and our own anti-war movement. The west is still hooked on walking, talking like a duck when they need to walk and talk like a camel.

Warrior-Mentor · 03-24-2006, 16:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Moroney

The perception of ridicule didn't do a whole lot for the Danes when they published the cartoons.

Didn't they mock Allah...not the terrorists themselves? Big difference IMHO.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Moroney

I think you have to understand the target audience before you start playing mind games or showing your distane for them. Got to get inside their heads and push the right buttons. Push the wrong buttons and you become part of the problem.

Agreed. That's a prereq for being able to conducta successful PSYOP campaign, which I think we're lacking right now. If every time a bomb went off, there was massive media coverage from the Iraqis with the theme being "Look at how the terrorist are destroying our country - shouldn't we take action to stop this?" Then list ways the common guy on the street could help prevent problems, from reporting, observation, etc. Establish systems to help them help themselves. I know. Easier said then done. What's the alternative?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Moroney

Your goal should be to destroy the myth that they are invincible but through demonstrated action that can be seen and understood by the target audience and those that they wish to influence in a manner that shows without any doubt that their stated beliefs and actions have led to this particular failure.

Separate the fish from the sea they swim in.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Moroney

It is all about perception and in a target audience who has been cultured from day one to believe that their role is right and guided by their god it becomes reality until it is demonstrated that perhaps their god is not on their side.

An AC-130 can help do that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Moroney

Western media and statements from the "infidels" without being backed up by actions understood and accepted by the target audience as failures in their effort or system only provides fodder for their psyop and our own anti-war movement. The west is still hooked on walking, talking like a duck when they need to walk and talk like a camel.

Exactly. The news stories/PSYOP spin need to come from the people we are trying to help.
Perhaps a couple could intern with Bill O'Reilly.

**Jack Moroney (RIP)** · 03-24-2006, 20:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warrior-Mentor

Didn't they mock Allah...not the terrorists themselves? Big difference IMHO.

.

Actually Mohammad, who spread the word and offered a choice between conversion or death! They basically depicted him as the role model for the use of terror in spreading the word and taking it to the infidels.

Warrior-Mentor · 03-25-2006, 02:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Moroney

Actually Mohammad, who spread the word and offered a choice between conversion or death! They basically depicted him as the role model for the use of terror in spreading the word and taking it to the infidels.

That's right...now I remember the discussion about the cartoon...never did get to see it though.

frostfire · 03-25-2006, 07:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Didn't a soldier just get six months today for humiliating a terrorist?TR

sad but true, Reaper Sir

Hope I'm not stepping over my line here, but at what point does the ridicule interfere with the required cultural sensitivity to win hearts and minds? Seems "the fish" is swimming with many other identical fish in the sea; I'd assume both the Afgan soldiers and the Talibans use "insyaalla." If that particular slogan/battle cry is ridiculed, then wouldn't it be like shooting our own leg?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warrior-Mentor

That's right...now I remember the discussion about the cartoon...never did get to see it though.

here's one WM Sir
http://professionalsoldiers.com/foru...895#post111895

spiritual ammunition indeed. I just spoke to a so-called moderate moslem the other day and he had a hard time bringing himself to condemn the terrorist. Instead, he referred to them as brothers and sisters

37F5V · 03-25-2006, 08:24

Ridicule was used on a very small scale during the drive North in '03. Basically calling out the Fedayeen by "appealing" to their manhood. The effect being those bastards came out of the woodwork in droves with a case of the Ass, allowing for U.S. forces to send them to their virgins with a quickness. This was a short term solution to get them to come out and fight as opposed to hiding in buildings behind women and children.

On a large scale this becomes quite a sensitive issue. The realm of politics interferes with war fighting like it or not. Good ideas may be generated at the lowest levels (they usually are), but approval comes from the top. Approval being the defining constraint.

Someone stated before that the most credible source would be the local populace, etc. I agree. I am of the opinion that unless we get the "friendly" Muslim nations to continually and aggressively denounce terrorism we are doomed to continue to lose the PSYOP fight on the Macro scale. We are after all just Infidels to them, minions of the Great Satan. How much credibility can we have?

03-25-2006, 09:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by frostfire

spiritual ammunition indeed. I just spoke to a so-called moderate moslem the other day and he had a hard time bringing himself to condemn the terrorist. Instead, he referred to them as brothers and sisters

I had people answering an questionnaire and performed an interview with a muslim girl on my last school, for a school project. She was by all means a moderate and in context the interview is pretty interesting. Anyway, a few days later I walked up to her and a friend of hers as they were chatting in the main entrance. Tried to be jolly while not disrespectful, appear nice and serious but not really understanding what I was asking outside of a "just want to complete the school task" way (without saying so), cordial and on the go, etc, to get her friend to answer the questionnaire too. One question was about political ideology where I had to explain the meaning of 'theocracy'. He crossed the box and signed the anonymous questionnaire...

Just a trivial sidenote... sorry for hijacking.

M

frostfire · 03-25-2006, 23:07

Thanks for the explanation PSYRGR

TFM · 03-26-2006, 08:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Moroney

The west is still hooked on walking, talking like a duck when they need to walk and talk like a camel.

In the case of this administration, God bless their souls, I think this about sums it up.

SRT31B · 03-26-2006, 15:15

DISCLAIMER: I am not an SME and would only like to throw in my own personal experiences.

A bit of background: I work in a place with a big fence and bright lights that are designed to keep people in, not out, if you catch my drift.

So far in my dealings with the followers of islam it has been my experience that perhaps the only real "effective" weapon against them would be thier religion itself. Anything else just doesn't seem like it would work too well. In dealing with these people I have found it to be like dealing with nothing more than little kids. Grown men with the mentality of 9 year olds. I would think that a few isolated instances of that may not be uncommon when you think about the environment that they're in, but when this is something all across the board that, to me, is significant.

I have yet to have much experience with people outside my workplace so I tend to be a bit biased in my opinion of them, but my hope is that not everyone has the same mentality as the ones that I deal with. The mindset of anyone that I have dealt with up to this point (with a VERY few exceptions) is one of extreme ignorance and hard headedness. These people know nothing but religion, and it dictates their entire life. From dawn till dusk I hear nothing but the mullahs teaching their sermons of jihad against the infidels in the name of allah. I really hope that there are at least some residents of this region a bit more enlightened than these.

To the point, an effective weapon: I had stated earlier that I believe their religion held the key. Unless I have misunderstood something, muslims believe that pig is an unclean animal. If they touch an unclean animal they are tainted and will not be able to enter heaven. Why not use this against them? Openly advertise that our bullets are coated in pig fat and that if an insurgent is struck by one he will be unclean and not fit to receive his reward of 40 virgins in heaven. I believe that this would effectively reduce, if not eliminate over time the number of people willing to risk their afterlife for their cause.

I am currently researching this further as I beleive sometime in the late 19th century there was a similiar uprising in the region where this tactic was also used effectively. Can't remember for sure so I just want to double check. I am also currently looking into islam as a whole because if you know your enemy you can better know how to defeat him.

The over riding fact though that I have come across in all my dealings so far is that muslims as a whole love death. America loves life. To them it is better to die in the name of allah than to live a long life. They don't care what it costs, in lives or time, so long as they kill as many as they can when they go, and it will never stop. Even the ones that I interact with are still constantly trying to find ways to kill us.

Like I stated earlier, I'm new to the game and I'm still doing my research, but so far I really don't think there is a way to "win the hearts and minds" of these people. And they really don't give the desired response to the whole "give them a hug and hold their hand" routine being forced on me and my coworkers right now.

Just my opinion. I could be wrong.