Hearts and Minds...

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by SirThomasHolland, Sep 28, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. The battle for hearts and minds was largely successful during the campaign in Malaysia. But can this policy be applied with equal success to any region or area of conflict?
    Our leaders seem to think so but I have my doubts. Helping people to improve their lives and country is a noble ambition and Im sure does generate some good will, but how much, depends on the particular circumstances of any given conflict.
    For example, could we have won the hearts and minds of the German people in the 1930's and convinced them not to give their support to the Nazis? Or were we better off spending that money on rearming.
    And in todays conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan how do we measure success? How much are we prepared to spend? and should this be the job of the military, especially when resources are diverted from essential equipment and maintaing an effective fighting capability?
    Tony McNulty, the Home Office Minister is the latest politician to use this phrase. In a speech at the Labour Party Conference he used it when talking about the "War on Terror", saying that we need to concentrate on winning the hearts and minds of British muslims. Statements like that lead me to believe that "winning the hearts and minds", has now become a euphemism for appeasement.
     
  2. We weren't fighting an insurgency in the Weimar Republic as we were in the other examples you cite.

    So far as Germany and the rise of the Nazis is relevant to the debate you are trying to start I would contend that the perceived maltreatment of the defeated Germany by the Allied powers and the ACTUAL economic damage done by the terms of there reparations imposed created the conditions which the Nazis were able to explot.

    "Squeezing Germany until the pips squeaked" was not a fruitful policy in the long term.
     
  3. Why should we have to try to win the hearts and minds of British subjects?
     
  4. I think he wants to win the hearts and minds of British muslims so they dont strap bombs to themselves and blow up trains and busses in Britain. Or carry out any other terrorist activity. But I dont see what more he could do.
    I think its just a sound bite/spin to make it sound like hes going to do something.
     
  5. I agree with what you're saying.

    We had to do hearts & minds in NI but was that the same as whats required now ? and even if it is I think Hearts and Minds does under this Liebour bunch of tarts mean appeasement.

    "if you've got them by the balls their Hearts and Minds will follow"
     
  6. We are unlikely to be able to win the heart and mind of anyone thus inclined in any event I suspect. We might however be able to limit their freedom of action by convincing the broader British Muslim population that it it not in their interests to allow them to prepare for or carry out such activities.

    Appeasement of who BTW?

    EDIT and how?
     
  7. One group of people whose hearts and minds they arent bothered about winning are the British Armed Forces
     
  8. double post
     
  9. True but irrelevant.