Scott Ritter, former Marine and UN weapons inspector, argues that there is a growing despondency amongst the anti-war movement. Ritter proposes the anti-war movement seek guidance from sources they normally spurn — that one must study the "enemy" in order to learn the art of campaigning and of waging battles when necessary. They need to understand the pro-war movement's decision-making cycle, then undertake a comprehensive course of action.

"Former U.N. weapons inspector Ritter (War on Iraq) is that rarity, a peacenik who's also a gung-ho ex-Marine besotted with the leatherneck's romanticized warrior ethos. In this eccentric manifesto, he critiques the antiwar movement in the light of military-philosophical chestnuts gleaned from Sun-Tzu, Marine Corps "maneuver warfare" principles and aerial combat guru John Boyd's "OODA-loop" theory. His mission, couched in a repetitious blend of stolid Pentagonese and bloody-minded exhortation, is to militarize the peace movement's organization ("A Type I Personnel Support Unit would be able to mobilize with a week's notice to deploy... for up to 7 days within a 500 mile radius") and attitude ("Dominate and destroy your enemy"). Unfortunately, Ritter's practical proposals are cumbersome and ill-considered, his political instincts hackneyed (proposed antiwar battle cry: reverence for the Constitution) and his intellectual conceits — which encompass everything from Newtonian physics to the centrality of "conflict" in life and shopping — unenlightening. The relevance of, say, dog-fighting doctrine to political organizing remains murky, except as a vague model of abstract virtues of speed, improvisation and initiative. Ritter raises cogent points about the peace movement's failure to think strategically, hone a compelling message and build bridges to mainstream America, but then obscures these issues in a fog of garbled war metaphors. (June)" Publishers Weekly (Copyright Reed Business Information, Inc.)

"'Former U.N. weapons inspector Ritter (War on Iraq) is that rarity, a peacenik who's also a gung-ho ex-Marine besotted with the leatherneck's romanticized warrior ethos. In this eccentric manifesto, he critiques the antiwar movement in the light of military-philosophical chestnuts gleaned from Sun-Tzu, Marine Corps 'maneuver warfare' principles and aerial combat guru John Boyd's 'OODA-loop' theory. His mission, couched in a repetitious blend of stolid Pentagonese and bloody-minded exhortation, is to militarize the peace movement's organization ('A Type I Personnel Support Unit would be able to mobilize with a week's notice to deploy... for up to 7 days within a 500 mile radius') and attitude ('Dominate and destroy your enemy'). Unfortunately, Ritter's practical proposals are cumbersome and ill-considered, his political instincts hackneyed (proposed antiwar battle cry: reverence for the Constitution) and his intellectual conceits — which encompass everything from Newtonian physics to the centrality of 'conflict' in life and shopping — unenlightening. The relevance of, say, dog-fighting doctrine to political organizing remains murky, except as a vague model of abstract virtues of speed, improvisation and initiative. Ritter raises cogent points about the peace movement's failure to think strategically, hone a compelling message and build bridges to mainstream America, but then obscures these issues in a fog of garbled war metaphors. (June)' Publishers Weekly (Copyright Reed Business Information, Inc.)" Publishers Weekly (Copyright Reed Business Information, Inc.)

In the months leading up to the invasion of Iraq, and ever since, Scott Ritter--a former US marine and UN weapons inspector--spent many hours speaking to numerous antiwar forums across the country and around the world. He was struck by the sincerity of the vast majority of those who call themselves antiwar and impressed by their willingness to give so much of themselves in the service of such a noble cause. But lately Ritter has noticed a growing despondency among this movement. With the United States now entering its fourth year of an illegal war and occupation of Iraq, and with the pro-war movement moving inexorably toward yet another disastrous conflict with Iran, there is an increasing awareness that the cause of the antiwar movement seems lost. What to do? Ritter proposes that the antiwar movement seek guidance from sources they would ordinarily spurn: the philosophies of those who have mastered the art of conflict, from Caesar to Napoleon, Sun Tzu to Clausewitz. In the vein of Rules for Radicals and The Art of War, Ritter argues that one must study the "enemy" in order to learn the art of campaigning, of waging battles only when necessary, and having the ability to wage a struggle on several fronts simultaneously. The antiwar movement needs to understand the pro-war movement's center of gravity. It needs to grasp the pro-war movement's decision-making cycle, then undertake a comprehensive course of action that learns to preempt this cycle, getting "inside" the pro-war system of making decisions.