Revolution in Military Affairs Continued Conversation with Chris Denzel, Part II
Jan 18, 2024
Chris Denzel, a knowledgeable expert in operational art and maneuver warfare, continues to share his insights. He discusses the evolution of precision strike warfare and its strategic implications in the Indo-Pacific. Denzel critiques the stagnation in military theory, influenced by funding sources that stifle innovation. He emphasizes the contrasts in military cultures between the U.S. and Japan, and the importance of learning from historical conflicts to improve contemporary military readiness. Their conversation wraps up with reflections on their past writings and personal commitments.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Precision Strike Shaped A Generation Of Warfare
- Precision strike dominated the last 20 years because counterinsurgency required limited destruction to achieve political ends.
- Chris Denzel argues precision was necessary in COIN but warns forces now 'swim' in that water and must reframe for other theaters like the Indo-Pacific.
Geography Makes Precision Mandatory In The Indo-Pacific
- In the Indo-Pacific naval and air ranges force reliance on long-range precision because the geography makes short-range fires irrelevant.
- Denzel notes islands 60–100 miles apart mean you must go long and be precise to hold sea lines of communication at risk.
Strike Is Positional Before It Becomes Attritional
- Strike can be positional or attritional depending on phase and force presence in theater.
- Denzel explains peacetime forward presence with long-range precision can deny enemy objectives (positional), but shooting can shift it to attrition.