Modernization/Development Theory, CORDS, and FM 3-24?

[Dayuhan]

Again I return to the question from a Soldier's perspective. What are the politicians, in response to public outcry, going to expect us to do in failed or failing states or in response to genocide or other war crimes? If we do intervene, do we just stop the carnage and withdraw? If not, what are the realistic options?

I doubt that there will be any consistent set of available options; what's available (and more important desirable) will inevitably have to be decided on a case to case basis. Inevitably in the case of democracies, home front politics will always play a role in determining what's done, for better or worse... usually for worse I expect but it's still inevitable. IMO the first prerequisite for intervention should be a specific, concrete, achievable goal ("nation building" is none of the above) but I'm probably not being realistic there.

In another article someone proposed the idea that Green Beret, in addition to FID, be capable of teaching basic economics to villagers, so I don't think I am being facetious when I toss these ideas out for comment.

I saw that series of articles, and I find their conclusions very tenuous. I'm not convinced that villagers need to be taught basic economics, or that lack of knowledge (of economics or anything else) among the villagers is a major constraint on development. The idea that we can resolve other people's problems by enlightening the benighted is a peculiarly American conceit that has rarely led us anywhere beneficial. We're often better off trying to learn from the villagers, rather than teach them, as they generally know their problems better than we do.