|← The War of 1812||Winnipeg General Strike of 1919 →|
Electronic warfare entails the use of the electromagnetic spectrum or energy that is directed. The purpose of using the electromagnetic spectrum or directed energy is to delay attacks by the enemy forces, attack an enemy, and control the spectrum. Notably, electromagnetic warfare can be orchestrated from anywhere including land, air, space, and the sea. Three main features are associated with electromagnetic warfare, and they include electronic protection, electronic attack, and electronic warfare support. Thus, these have escalated the debate regarding the positive and negative effects of electronic warfare. Several positive effects abound, and they include the reduction in number of casualties in the war, it is suitable for postwar construction, and facilitates the quick ending of the war. However, opponents advance that points such as it leads to electronic pollution. In addition, they point out that electronic warfare instruments require a lot of assembling, which requires a secluded environment because if it is done carelessly, it can lead to adverse effects on the health of the soldiers, civilians, or the enemy forces (MacGHEE, P. 7). Given the aforementioned points regarding the positive effects of war, I assert that electronic warfare has a positive effect on the war.
Firstly, electronic warfare has a positive effect on war because it facilitates the quick ending of the war. Electronic warfare can be instrumental in ending war quick given the technology that is used for countering the enemies. For instance, it is indicated that electronic warfare employs the use of the electronic spectrum that has a main objective of delaying the enemy attacks (Adamy, P. 38). Arguably, with the use of the electromagnetic spectrum, it is easier to disarm the enemy forces quickly, which leads to their surrendering; thus, end of the war. In addition, since the electronic warfare can be applied anywhere, this provides an easier way of locating the enemy forces whether it is on the sea, land, space, or air; thus, a quick ending of the war. Notably, it can be used to delay enemy attacks, which in turn frustrate their efforts and can lead the enemy to abandon their plan because of the anticipated commencement, which affects their morale negatively. The fact that electronic warfare utilizes any medium be it air, land, space or the sea means that it can be used to disable the technology used by the enemy forces, and this will render them radar less; thus, leave them with no choice, but to surrender.
Secondly, electronic warfare has a positive effect on war because it lessens the number of casualties in the war. Evidently, electronic warfare employs the use of the three significant components, which are electronic protection, electronic warfare support, and electronic attack. Basing on this, we deduct that all the three significant components contribute essentially to both space and air operations. Arguably, this limits the number of people to be used for such operations; thus, lowering the number of casualties. Secondly, since commanders use the technology in electromagnetic warfare to check the position of the enemy forces (Herner and Company, P. 201), this helps in reduction of the number of casualties because a commander cannot risk sending his troops in a place that is infested by the enemy forces. Research also indicates that if the electromagnetic warfare is well incorporated by a commander, it is much easier to advance a surprise attack on the enemies, which leaves them with no option, but to surrender. Arguably, there will not be many casualties in the war, as the enemy force will be taken as prisoners of war.
Thirdly, electromagnetic warfare is suitable for postwar construction as minimum destruction is orchestrated. Research indicates that, with the development of the electromagnetic warfare, there has been a constant development of technologies for reducing losses regarding the instruments used in war. Thus, the United States employed electronic counter-measures in the war in Iraq, which reduced losses by 25% (MacGHEE, P. 4). It is also indicated that the United States Air force employed use antiradiation and standoff weapons, which promoted their accuracy while at the same time reduced losses. Arguably, this provides proof regarding the amount of losses anticipated when electromagnetic warfare is incorporated because there will be minimum destruction. Another essential point to note is the components used in electronic warfare. These include the electronic attacks, electronic protection, and electronic warfare support. Arguably, if an army incorporates these three well, there will be a minimal destruction after the war because the three components have the capability to detect, disrupt or deny enemy attacks. This will minimize the postwar construction as less or no loss will have resulted from the war.
On the other hand, the opponents of electromagnetic warfare advance that it leads to electronic pollution (Herner and Company, P. 133). This is a somewhat valid point considering the type of material that is employed in making of the instruments used in electromagnetic warfare. Research asserts that most of instruments used in electromagnetic warfare are made from either metal or plastic, which does not decompose. Arguably, after an instrument has being used or it has outlived its usefulness, it must be thrashed appropriately, and this is a problem when it comes to electromagnetic warfare instruments because they, whichever way they are disposed, they pollute the environment. Another point advanced by the opponents is that electromagnetic warfare utilizes infrared beams and radiation (Alexander, P. 117). According to health digest, continuous exposition to radiation and infrared beams can lead to cancer. Thus, the opponents argue that electromagnetic warfare should not be promoted when it has some inherent health risks to users of the instruments. They also argue that treatment of cancers is expensive; thus, it is better if the use of electromagnetic warfare is abandoned, as it will reduce unwarranted contraction.
In conclusion, electromagnetic use to enhance air, land, sea, and space conflict has been met with several debates. Electromagnetic warfare applies three main components, which are electronic protection, electronic attack, and electronic warfare support. These three contribute towards the positive effects electromagnetic warfare given their functions. Three main points are advanced to support electromagnetic warfare as resulting in positive effects. Firstly, electromagnetic warfare has a positive effect of ensuring that war finishes quickly. This is supported by the fact that electronic attack can be used, which will get the adversary forces unprepared; thus, they are taken as prisoners of war. Electromagnetic warfare has also advanced weapons that can be used for surveillance and perpetrating attacks, which eliminates the time, spend on spying using informal means. Secondly, electronic warfare is expedient for postwar clean up. This is because the technology applied has increased sharpness in aiming; thus, reducing unnecessary losses caused by hitting unwarranted targets. Thirdly, electromagnetic warfare has a positive effect on war because it facilitates a reduction in the number of casualties. Arguably, with the use of advanced instruments such as radar helps to locate the exact location where the enemies are, and this will prevent injuries to innocent people. On the other hand, opponents refute these claims and advance that electromagnetic warfare leads to electronic pollution because there is no appropriate way of disposing the instruments after usage. In addition, the instruments used in electromagnetic warfare are made from materials that do not easily decompose. I support the fact that electromagnetic warfare has a positive effect on war because of the points outlined above.