Weapons of Strategic Influence

I learned a new term from an interesting blog called "The Terrorist's Dictionary." Plotinus takes umbrage at the Joint IED Defeat Office's term "weapon of strategic influence" in describing the insurgent's current weapon of choice.

According to its website, the JIEDDO's mission is "to eliminate IEDs as weapons of strategic influence."

So the problem with IEDs isn't that they kill or injure our troops. It's that they influence public opinion. They are weapons of propaganda.

"It can be mitigated, minimized, made into a nuisance," said Gen. Montgomery C. Meigs (ret.), the JIEDDO director, taking a page from John Kerry's anti-terrorism playbook.

How do we defeat "weapons of strategic influence"? Not by outfitting our troops with armor. Not by improving our intelligence and infiltration of insurgency groups. No.

We defeat them by funding sources of counter-propaganda: pro-war think tanks, pundits, and bloggers.

I think Plotinus is talking tongue-in-cheek, but I'm not sure. I take the office's meaning - the IEDs have a far more significant impact on the strategic level than from the tactical injuries. That doesn't mean, however, that our efforts to defeat these WSIs ought to be by relying on the 101st Fighting Keyboarders to counter the "bad news."

Comments

[Maxtrue]

And another valid term: Weapons of Mass Disruption.

[Grandjester]

More like Mass Turbation. Why do we need to jingo up or acronym every goddamn thing?!?!

[Plotinus]

Thanks for the link and discussion.

My site is satirical, but I did use a commonly accepted connotation for "strategic influence."

Could you explain what sort of impact IEDs might have "on the strategic level," such that they are "weapons of strategic influence"?

[J.]

Plotinus, I especially enjoyed your definition of "think-tank" - meant to point that out to the crowd. I think the "strategic influence" is just the emphasis on the fact that actions taken during a counterinsurgency - especially at the tactical level (whether enemy or friendly) - has an impact on the perception of success and failure at the strategic level. Normal warfighting, you don't see those verberations. Tactical stays tactical. I think the term "strategic corporal" has been used to discuss this aspect. Thus, insurgent IED attacks and small squads of Marines causing excessive noncombatant deaths, while tactical, cause strategic implications.