Vehicle Ambush v2.0

 

The definition of hybrid warfare designates a combination of tactics and strategies; some from the conventional school, some from the asymmetrical and some from the cyber. It is this integration of cyber techniques that can make traditional and asymmetric battlefield strategies much more deadly and efficient.

Imagine this: a small insurgent force, (platoon strength or around 30 men) is planning a vehicle ambush on a convoy of enemy trucks thought to be carrying small arms, ammunition and explosives. The plan is to ambush the trucks, kill the drivers and soldiers guarding it and confiscate the weapons. The standard “L” ambush is agreed upon, and positions assigned (In this case, for the sake of clarity, the platoon is divided up into 3 “Elements”; Assault, Support and Security. The team leader of the Assault element is told  that the goal is the safe retrieval of the weapons and explosives; not the destruction of them, so pass along the word to it is crucial that the drivers are killed first so there is a smaller chance for escape. After the drivers, then focus on the small contingent of guards, which we estimate only to be around 10 men with small arms. Once all the specifics have been worked out, a key member of the ambush team, the “Cyber” element speaks.

“I will start hacking the internal systems of the lead vehicle 1/8 mile from the ambush zone, killing all the electronics in a systematic fashion and hopefully immobilizing the lead vehicle here, at or around point here.” The cyber-tech points to a spot on the map marked “Kill Box”. “Once the lead vehicle is immobilized, the other vehicles will be forced to stop and will be unable to turn around due to a blocking action of the rear element. It is imperative that the ambush starts ONLY after the lead vehicle is immobile. If the enemy are alerted to our presence too early, they will surely call for reinforcements and with the QRF response times we have monitored averaging 12 to 15 minutes, combined with the distance from the nearest base, they will be on top of us in under 45 to 50 minutes, so it is imperative that 5 minutes before the ambush, all cell phone and radio freqs are jammed by our Commo (Communications Officer). Once the lead vehicle is immobile, it will be the job of the support element to execute a blocking formation by moving our ‘requisitioned’ school bus across the road to prevent escape. With the lead vehicle immobile and the rear exit blocked, the remaining guards will either fight or flee, if they run, it will be the job of the security elements to scoop them up. Once the guards are eliminated or captured, trucks will be searched for GPS beacons and disabled. Seeing the trucks are still driveable, they will then be driven out, if not, and they are damaged, arms and ammo will be unloaded into our trucks, this will eat up valuable time, so again, all efforts must be made not to damage the enemy vehicles during the ambush!”

Now although the above is presented as a fictional “what could be” event, a recent article in WIRED showed just how easy hacking and hijacking a vehicles internal computer can be with the right gear and know-how.

If one wanted to go even further on the “what if” scale, consider if local municipality or statewide infrastructure like traffic lights, CCTV cameras (for operational surveillance) train crossings, HOV Lanes and even drawbridge controls were hacked for the purpose of physically stopping or slowing down a vehicle so an ambush, assassination, robbery, etc., could take place.

Hollywood of course, has picked up on this theme, but focusing mainly on just the “cyber” side of things and not the “hybrid” integration we are discussing.  In the Showtime series Homeland, the United States VP’s Pacemaker is hacked by a terrorist group causing rapid heart arrhythmia and eventually death. Again, considering what the OPM hack showed us in how sensitive data (like sensitive medical records for example) are vulnerable to manipulation, this is something to consider as we traverse what will most likely be known in history as the 21st “Cyber” Century.

The “Hybrid” integration of cyber threats with asymmetrical warfare has unlimited possibilities. Of course what I have hypothesized here today is thinking very “small” in terms of overall strategy, but I wanted to show that for all practical purposes, these types of hybrid tactics, when planned and executed with violence of action, can and will work.

Stay Armed and Stay Dangerous!

Taking a Spoon to a Gunfight

David Maxwell

April 2, 2014 · in Commentary

 

Taking a Spoon to a Gunfight: The West Dealing with Russian Unconventional and Political Warfare in Former Soviet States

As the Russians now try to reach a diplomatic solution in order to consolidate their gains in Crimea – as evidenced by Putin’s call to Obama and SECSTATE’s meeting with the Russian foreign minister – it is useful to try to understand how Russia has used all of its elements of national power to achieve its objectives.

While the United States has spent the last decade-plus trying to learn to “eat soup with a knife,” the Russians have been reaching back to some tried and true methods from the Cold War.  Some in the U.S. national security community want to continue to focus on expeditionary counterinsurgency warfare and armed nation building while others long for large-scale maneuver warfare along the lines of the Fulda Gap.  However, while we debate these two forms of warfare and the proper balance between them, the Russians are practicing something different: unconventional warfare in support of political warfare to achieve its strategic objectives.

A friend asked me recently if the Russians were conducting unconventional warfare in Ukraine and in particular in Crimea.  Even a superficial analysis shows that they are using much of the standard definition of unconventional warfare:

activities to enable a resistance or insurgency to coerce, disrupt, or overthrow a government or occupying power through and with an underground, auxiliary and guerrilla forces in a denied area.

Read the Remainder at War on the Rocks HERE.

Defeating Drones: How to Build a Thermal Evasion Suit

Posted on June 16, 2015 by Brandon Smith

This article was written by Brandon Smith and the included video was a joint project between Oath Keepers and Alt-Market

Asymmetric tactics rely on the idea of fighting smarter, rather than fighting directly, against a larger or more technologically advanced aggressor. It means turning your opponent’s strengths into weaknesses.

For instance, if your opponent relies on the superiority of his tanks and armor, make him fight in the mountains where his armor is useless. If he relies on air superiority, make him sift through a thick canopy where his eye in the sky sees nothing, or make it dangerous for him to land and refuel such vehicles at all. If he relies on body armor for safety, make him fight uphill so that the extra weight wears him down. If his surveillance and security techniques are a little too sensitive and effective, create constant false positives, until he can no longer trust his own alert systems. And, if most of his weaponry and soldiers are heavily reliant on a particular piece of technology, make that technology useless in the field. Force your opponent to fight on fairer ground, where the man with the most skill and intelligence prevails rather than the man with the most million dollar toys.

There is no such thing as fool proof combat technology. There is a way to trick or defeat or survive ANY weapon and any enemy. Period.

Read the Remainder at DC Clothesline HERE

Make it a priority to have one of these in your BOB.

Stay Alert, Stay Armed, Stay Prepared and Stay Dangerous!