Gen. Mattis:
"The problem with being too busy to read is that you learn by experience (or by your men’s experience), i.e. the hard way. By reading, you learn through others’ experiences, generally a better way to do business, especially in our line of work where the consequences of incompetence are so final for young men.
Thanks to my reading, I have never been caught flat-footed by any situation, never at a loss for how any problem has been addressed (successfully or unsuccessfully) before. It doesn’t give me all the answers, but it lights what is often a dark path ahead.
With [Task Force] 58, I had w/ me Slim’s book, books about the Russian and British experiences in [Afghanistan], and a couple others. Going into Iraq, “The Siege” (about the Brits’ defeat at Al Kut in WW I) was req’d reading for field grade officers. I also had Slim’s book; reviewed T.E. Lawrence’s “Seven Pillars of Wisdom”; a good book about the life of Gertrude Bell (the Brit archaeologist who virtually founded the modern Iraq state in the aftermath of WW I and the fall of the Ottoman empire); and “From Beirut to Jerusalem”. I also went deeply into Liddell Hart’s book on Sherman, and Fuller’s book on Alexander the Great got a lot of my attention (although I never imagined that my HQ would end up only 500 meters from where he lay in state in Babylon).
Ultimately, a real understanding of history means that we face NOTHING new under the sun.
For all the “4th Generation of War” intellectuals running around today saying that the nature of war has fundamentally changed, the tactics are wholly new, etc, I must respectfully say … “Not really”: Alex the Great would not be in the least bit perplexed by the enemy that we face right now in Iraq, and our leaders going into this fight do their troops a disservice by not studying (studying, vice just reading) the men who have gone before us.
We have been fighting on this planet for 5000 years and we should take advantage of their experience. “Winging it” and filling body bags as we sort out what works reminds us of the moral dictates and the cost of incompetence in our profession. As commanders and staff officers, we are coaches and sentries for our units: how can we coach anything if we don’t know a hell of a lot more than just the [Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures]? What happens when you’re on a dynamic battlefield and things are changing faster than higher [Headquarters] can stay abreast? Do you not adapt because you cannot conceptualize faster than the enemy’s adaptation?
(Darwin has a pretty good theory about the outcome for those who cannot adapt to changing circumstance — in the information age things can change rather abruptly and at warp speed, especially the moral high ground which our regimented thinkers cede far too quickly in our recent fights.) And how can you be a sentinel and not have your unit caught flat-footed if you don’t know what the warning signs are — that your unit’s preps are not sufficient for the specifics of a tasking that you have not anticipated?
Perhaps if you are in support functions waiting on the warfighters to spell out the specifics of what you are to do, you can avoid the consequences of not reading. Those who must adapt to overcoming an independent enemy’s will are not allowed that luxury.
This is not new to the USMC approach to warfighting — Going into Kuwait 12 years ago, I read (and reread) Rommel’s Papers (remember “Kampstaffel”?), Montgomery’s book (“Eyes Officers”…), “Grant Takes Command” (need for commanders to get along, “commanders’ relationships” being more important than “command relationships”), and some others.
As a result, the enemy has paid when I had the opportunity to go against them, and I believe that many of my young guys lived because I didn’t waste their lives because I didn’t have the vision in my mind of how to destroy the enemy at least cost to our guys and to the innocents on the battlefields.
Hope this answers your question…. I will cc my ADC in the event he can add to this. He is the only officer I know who has read more than I."
Semper Fi, Mattis
"The problem with being too busy to read is that you learn by experience (or by your men’s experience), i.e. the hard way. By reading, you learn through others’ experiences, generally a better way to do business, especially in our line of work where the consequences of incompetence are so final for young men.
Thanks to my reading, I have never been caught flat-footed by any situation, never at a loss for how any problem has been addressed (successfully or unsuccessfully) before. It doesn’t give me all the answers, but it lights what is often a dark path ahead.
With [Task Force] 58, I had w/ me Slim’s book, books about the Russian and British experiences in [Afghanistan], and a couple others. Going into Iraq, “The Siege” (about the Brits’ defeat at Al Kut in WW I) was req’d reading for field grade officers. I also had Slim’s book; reviewed T.E. Lawrence’s “Seven Pillars of Wisdom”; a good book about the life of Gertrude Bell (the Brit archaeologist who virtually founded the modern Iraq state in the aftermath of WW I and the fall of the Ottoman empire); and “From Beirut to Jerusalem”. I also went deeply into Liddell Hart’s book on Sherman, and Fuller’s book on Alexander the Great got a lot of my attention (although I never imagined that my HQ would end up only 500 meters from where he lay in state in Babylon).
Ultimately, a real understanding of history means that we face NOTHING new under the sun.
For all the “4th Generation of War” intellectuals running around today saying that the nature of war has fundamentally changed, the tactics are wholly new, etc, I must respectfully say … “Not really”: Alex the Great would not be in the least bit perplexed by the enemy that we face right now in Iraq, and our leaders going into this fight do their troops a disservice by not studying (studying, vice just reading) the men who have gone before us.
We have been fighting on this planet for 5000 years and we should take advantage of their experience. “Winging it” and filling body bags as we sort out what works reminds us of the moral dictates and the cost of incompetence in our profession. As commanders and staff officers, we are coaches and sentries for our units: how can we coach anything if we don’t know a hell of a lot more than just the [Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures]? What happens when you’re on a dynamic battlefield and things are changing faster than higher [Headquarters] can stay abreast? Do you not adapt because you cannot conceptualize faster than the enemy’s adaptation?
(Darwin has a pretty good theory about the outcome for those who cannot adapt to changing circumstance — in the information age things can change rather abruptly and at warp speed, especially the moral high ground which our regimented thinkers cede far too quickly in our recent fights.) And how can you be a sentinel and not have your unit caught flat-footed if you don’t know what the warning signs are — that your unit’s preps are not sufficient for the specifics of a tasking that you have not anticipated?
Perhaps if you are in support functions waiting on the warfighters to spell out the specifics of what you are to do, you can avoid the consequences of not reading. Those who must adapt to overcoming an independent enemy’s will are not allowed that luxury.
This is not new to the USMC approach to warfighting — Going into Kuwait 12 years ago, I read (and reread) Rommel’s Papers (remember “Kampstaffel”?), Montgomery’s book (“Eyes Officers”…), “Grant Takes Command” (need for commanders to get along, “commanders’ relationships” being more important than “command relationships”), and some others.
As a result, the enemy has paid when I had the opportunity to go against them, and I believe that many of my young guys lived because I didn’t waste their lives because I didn’t have the vision in my mind of how to destroy the enemy at least cost to our guys and to the innocents on the battlefields.
Hope this answers your question…. I will cc my ADC in the event he can add to this. He is the only officer I know who has read more than I."
Semper Fi, Mattis
1. ‘It’s quite fun to shoot them, you know. It’s a hell of a hoot. It’s fun to shoot some people.’
In 2005, he offered this commentary on war: “You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them.”
He continued: “Actually it's quite fun to fight them, you know. It's a hell of a hoot. It's fun to shoot some people. I'll be right up there with you. I like brawling.”
At the time, after the remarks made some waves, Marine commandant Gen. Michael Hagee noted that Mattis “often speaks with a great deal of candor.”
In 2005, he offered this commentary on war: “You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them.”
He continued: “Actually it's quite fun to fight them, you know. It's a hell of a hoot. It's fun to shoot some people. I'll be right up there with you. I like brawling.”
At the time, after the remarks made some waves, Marine commandant Gen. Michael Hagee noted that Mattis “often speaks with a great deal of candor.”
2. ‘There are some assholes in the world that just need to be shot.’
Speaking to some 200 Marines, Mattis had this advice, according to longtime reporter Thomas Ricks: “The first time you blow someone away is not an insignificant event. That said, there are some assholes in the world that just need to be shot.”
Mattis elaborated, “There are hunters and there are victims. By your discipline, cunning, obedience and alertness, you will decide if you are a hunter or a victim. It’s really a hell of a lot of fun. You’re gonna have a blast out here!”
And: “I feel sorry for every son of a bitch that doesn’t get to serve with you.”
Speaking to some 200 Marines, Mattis had this advice, according to longtime reporter Thomas Ricks: “The first time you blow someone away is not an insignificant event. That said, there are some assholes in the world that just need to be shot.”
Mattis elaborated, “There are hunters and there are victims. By your discipline, cunning, obedience and alertness, you will decide if you are a hunter or a victim. It’s really a hell of a lot of fun. You’re gonna have a blast out here!”
And: “I feel sorry for every son of a bitch that doesn’t get to serve with you.”
4. ‘Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.’
According to the same report, Mattis advised his Marines in Iraq to stay vigilant. In that vein, he also once said, “There is only one ‘retirement plan’ for terrorists.”
According to the same report, Mattis advised his Marines in Iraq to stay vigilant. In that vein, he also once said, “There is only one ‘retirement plan’ for terrorists.”
6. ‘In a country with millions of people and cars going everywhere, the enemy is going to get a car bomb out there once in awhile.’
Matt was characteristically blunt in a 2007 interview with the San Diego Union-Tribune. “There are going to be good days and bad days. Bottom line,” he concluded.
Matt was characteristically blunt in a 2007 interview with the San Diego Union-Tribune. “There are going to be good days and bad days. Bottom line,” he concluded.
8. ‘I get a lot of credit these days for things I never did.’
For all his proverbial outspokenness, in a 2004 speech at the Naval Academy, Mattis was reportedly modest about his accomplishments.
9. “Engage your brain before you engage your weapon.”
Mattis, a student of counterinsurgency tactics and strategy, sent this advice to his Marine unit only a few hours before they helped kick off the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
“While we will move swiftly and aggressively against those who resist, we will treat all others with decency, demonstrating chivalry and soldierly compassion for people who have endured a lifetime under Saddam’s oppression,” he wrote.
For all his proverbial outspokenness, in a 2004 speech at the Naval Academy, Mattis was reportedly modest about his accomplishments.
9. “Engage your brain before you engage your weapon.”
Mattis, a student of counterinsurgency tactics and strategy, sent this advice to his Marine unit only a few hours before they helped kick off the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
“While we will move swiftly and aggressively against those who resist, we will treat all others with decency, demonstrating chivalry and soldierly compassion for people who have endured a lifetime under Saddam’s oppression,” he wrote.
Oh Jesus. Enfuego Quotes above.
Liberals are gonna lose their mind even worse.
I posted the Graphic Video up there, cuz War is Awful.
I apologize profusely if it was troubling to any who have Served in War Zones....Afghanistan, Iraq, Nam...N. Korea....
Islamists Demand This though, Warfare.
And Mattis while, yes...he does speak with more Candor than any man since Patton has...
Mattis is not incorrect, in what he says.
Thank God for Mad Dog, Thank God
cuz this scourge has got to be stopped
as it has before.
1,400 Years of Christian/Islamic Struggle: An Analysis
I was very disappointed to see that U.S. News would publish a clearly false article, adopting the world's clearly false, politically correct (PC) view of the place of the Crusades in history.
What makes it even worse, the article hides its views under the additional headline falsehood, "The Truth About the Epic Clash Between Christianity and Islam."
Let me explain.
http://www1.cbn.com/churchandministry/1400-years-of-christian-islamic-struggle
Liberals are gonna lose their mind even worse.
I posted the Graphic Video up there, cuz War is Awful.
I apologize profusely if it was troubling to any who have Served in War Zones....Afghanistan, Iraq, Nam...N. Korea....
Islamists Demand This though, Warfare.
And Mattis while, yes...he does speak with more Candor than any man since Patton has...
Mattis is not incorrect, in what he says.
Thank God for Mad Dog, Thank God
cuz this scourge has got to be stopped
as it has before.
1,400 Years of Christian/Islamic Struggle: An Analysis
I was very disappointed to see that U.S. News would publish a clearly false article, adopting the world's clearly false, politically correct (PC) view of the place of the Crusades in history.
What makes it even worse, the article hides its views under the additional headline falsehood, "The Truth About the Epic Clash Between Christianity and Islam."
Let me explain.
http://www1.cbn.com/churchandministry/1400-years-of-christian-islamic-struggle
I'd be worried too if I were an innocent civilian attending a wedding. Took "Mad Dog" 30 seconds to give the order to murder 42 civilian men, women and children.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mukaradeeb_wedding_party_massacre
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2004/05/24/iraq-wedding-party-video-backs-survivors-claims.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mukaradeeb_wedding_party_massacre
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2004/05/24/iraq-wedding-party-video-backs-survivors-claims.html
