Re: [rohrpost] shock and awe/ b - o - y - k - o - t - t

[Oliver Grau <Oliver.Grau@culture.hu-berlin.de>]

Es waere schoen, wenn konstruktiv diskutiert werden koennte und nicht solch
Geblubber von Leuten ohne Namen gespammt wird...
 
Ein guter Vorschlag, der bereits praktiziert wird, lautet, dass
boykottierte US Hersteller oeffentlich erklaeren, dass sie gegen die
Verletzung des Voelkerrechts sind, worauf die Geschaeftsbeziehungen dann
wieder aufgenommen werden (vgl.
http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/0,1518,241645,00.html). 
Wie auch immer: Wir werden nicht umhinkommen, Ueberlegungen anzustellen,
wie das Voelkerrecht geschuetzt werden kann, da helfen keine Zynismen. 

uebrigens.. meine Frau ist Amerikanerin, wie koennte ich da wohl
nationalistisch sein.. ;-)

best 
oliver



At 17:49 22.03.03 +0100, you wrote:
>wenn du schon und wieder so viel nachdenkst �ber boykott und anderes
>(eventuell noch ein embargo?), dann versuch doch mal vom nationalistischen
>(boykotiert amerika) zum herstellerorientierten (boykotiert die
>kriegsindustrie und krieggewinnler und kriegsunterst�tzer) denken zu
>wechseln. dann gewinnt dein unterfangen an sch�rfe.
>lg,
>-- 
>SaB*
>
>On Sat, 22 Mar 2003, Oliver Grau wrote:
>
>> Vielleicht waere ein Boykott amerikanischer Produkte doch noch einmal
>> ernsthaft zu ueberlegen. Ich moechte meine zunaechst ablehnende Haltung
>> zuruecknehmen, die nur von einer bundesrepublikanischen Perspektive
>> ausging. Da mittlerweile jedoch weltweit Boykottueberlegungen diskutiert
>> und begonnen werden (von Esso bis zur Filmindustrie), sollten wir uns
>> anschliessen. Die alte Gandhi Idee koennte, wenn sie nun erstmals ueber das
>> Netz effektiv organisiert und weltweit praktiziert wird, vielleicht doch
>> Wirkung zeigen.
>>
>>
>>
>>  At 17:11 22.03.03 +0100, you wrote:
>> >
>> >das buch zum angriff:
>> >"Shock & Awe. Achieving Rapid Dominance." 1996.
>> >http://www.dodccrp.org/shockIndex.html
>> >
>> >
>> >kleine kostprobe:
>> >
>> >"It is, of course, clear that U.S. military forces are currently the
>> >most capable in the world and are likely to remain so for a long time
>> >to come. Why then, many will ask, should we examine and even propose
>> >major excursions and changes if the country occupies this position of
>> >military superiority? For reasons noted in this study, we believe
>> >that excursions are important if only to confirm the validity of
>> >current defense approaches. There are several overrarching realities
>> >that have led us to this conclusion. First, while everyone recognizes
>> >that the Cold War has ended, there is not a consensus about what this
>> >means for more precisely defining the nature of our future security
>> >needs. Despite this absence of both clairvoyance and a galvanizing
>> >external danger, the United States is actively examining new
>> >strategic options and choices. The variety of conceptual efforts
>> >underway in the Pentagon to deal with this uncertainty exemplifies
>> >this reality. (...)
>> >
>> >The aim of Rapid Dominance is to affect the will, perception, and
>> >understanding of the adversary to fit or respond to our strategic
>> >policy ends through imposing a regime of Shock and Awe. Clearly, the
>> >traditional military aim of destroying, defeating, or neutralizing
>> >the adversary's military capability is a fundamental and necessary
>> >component of Rapid Dominance. Our intent, however, is to field a
>> >range of capabilities to induce sufficient Shock and Awe to render
>> >the adversary impotent. This means that physical and psychological
>> >effects must be obtained.
>> >
>> >Rapid Dominance would therefore provide the ability to control, on an
>> >immediate basis, the entire region of operational interest and the
>> >environment, broadly defined, in and around that area of interest.
>> >Beyond achieving decisive force and dominant battlefield awareness,
>> >we envisage Rapid Dominance producing a capability that can more
>> >effectively and efficiently achieve the stated political or military
>> >objectives underwriting the use of force by rendering the adversary
>> >completely impotent.
>> >
>> >In Rapid Dominance, "rapid" means the ability to move quickly before
>> >an adversary can react. This notion of rapidity applies throughout
>> >the spectrum of combat from pre-conflict deployment to all stages of
>> >battle and conflict resolution.
>> >
>> >"Dominance" means the ability to affect and dominate an adversary's
>> >will both physically and psychologically. Physical dominance includes
>> >the ability to destroy, disarm, disrupt, neutralize, and to render
>> >impotent. Psychological dominance means the ability to destroy,
>> >defeat, and neuter the will of an adversary to resist; or convince
>> >the adversary to accept our terms and aims short of using force. The
>> >target is the adversary's will, perception, and understanding. The
>> >principal mechanism for achieving this dominance is through imposing
>> >sufficient conditions of "Shock and Awe" on the adversary to convince
>> >or compel it to accept our strategic aims and military objectives.
>> >Clearly, deception, confusion, misinformation, and disinformation,
>> >perhaps in massive amounts, must be employed.
>> >
>> >(...)
>> >Theoretically, the magnitude of Shock and Awe Rapid Dominance seeks
>> >to impose (in extreme cases) is the non-nuclear equivalent of the
>> >impact that the atomic weapons dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki had
>> >on the Japanese. The Japanese were prepared for suicidal resistance
>> >until both nuclear bombs were used. The impact of those weapons was
>> >sufficient to transform both the mindset of the average Japanese
>> >citizen and the outlook of the leadership through this condition of
>> >Shock and Awe. The Japanese simply could not comprehend the
>> >destructive power carried by a single airplane. This incomprehension
>> >produced a state of awe.
>> >
>> >(...)
>> >The goals of achieving Rapid Dominance using Shock and Awe must be
>> >compared with overwhelming force. "Rapid" implies the ability to
>> >"own" the dimension of time-moving more quickly than an opponent,
>> >operating within his decision cycle, and resolving conflict favorably
>> >in a short period of time. "Dominance" means the ability to control a
>> >situation totally.
>> >
>> >(...)
>> >Rapid Dominance must be all-encompassing. It will require the means
>> >to anticipate and to counter all opposing moves. It will involve the
>> >capability to deny an opponent things of critical value, and to
>> >convey the unmistakable message that unconditional compliance is the
>> >only available recourse. It will imply more than the direct
>> >application of force. It will mean the ability to control the
>> >environment and to master all levels of an opponent's activities to
>> >affect will, perception, and understanding. This could include means
>> >of communication, transportation, food production, water supply, and
>> >other aspects of infrastructure as well as the denial of military
>> >responses. Deception, misinformation, and disinformation are key
>> >components in this assault on the will and understanding of the
>> >opponent.
>> >
>> >
>> >(...)
>> >Finally, we argue that what is also new in this approach is the way
>> >in which we attempt to integrate far more broadly strategy,
>> >technology, and innovation to achieve Shock and Awe. It is this
>> >interaction and focus which we think will provide the most
>> >interesting results."
>> >usw. usw.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >-------------------------------------------------------
>> >rohrpost - deutschsprachige Liste zur Kultur digitaler Medien und Netze
>> >Archiv: http://www.nettime.org/rohrpost
>> http://post.openoffice.de/pipermail/rohrpost/
>> >Ent/Subskribieren:
>> http://post.openoffice.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rohrpost/
>> >
>>
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------
rohrpost - deutschsprachige Liste zur Kultur digitaler Medien und Netze
Archiv: http://www.nettime.org/rohrpost http://post.openoffice.de/pipermail/rohrpost/
Ent/Subskribieren: http://post.openoffice.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rohrpost/