Quote Originally Posted by Bob's World View Post
Personally I think I take a lean, clean, logical aproach to COG analysis
I'd suggest perhaps excessively lean, possibly overly logical in contrast to the human conflicts it discusses which are rarely logical and thus perhaps not as firmly cast as some might think.

I do sort of wonder how it can be clean if the water is muddied by pointless battles over terminology...
...This thread is about applying a logical methodology to get at the most important things that one must get at in order to prevail in an insurgency.
Some insurgencies? I agree. All? Arguable.
I can call a horse a pig, but it is still a horse.
True. However, you might offend some pigs (or horses...); might attract undue attention of a sort that can adversely impact adoption of your hypothesis and possibly lose some supporters by imposing your will on a height difference or definition that adds to the confusion and proliferation of terms and which could even exacerbate "that jumbled mess of operationalizing it that the US Joint doctrine takes lately." You may be unnecessarily complifying.

All of course, your prerogative -- my thoughts are simply offered for your consideration only and I for one make no claims to having any solutions to the problems of mankind...