Results 1 to 20 of 23

Thread: Revisiting DR Kilcullen's piece on New Paradigms and the OSS

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rob Thornton View Post
    I think what is important is the way we think about the problem - using the analysis of the problem and its conditions to shape the solution vs. trying to use existing solutions against a problem for which they were not designed to anticipate.
    The danger here is that we presume that there is a broad, possibly new but nonetheless enduring, problem--whether its CT or stability/PKO ops, or COIN.

    I'm not so sure that there is. Not that there aren't new challenges--obviously there are, as 9/11 highlighted--but different parts of the CT (or PKO or whatever) puzzle require very different approaches, approaches that vary over time and space and political context. Quite apart from the dangers of going through major organizational bureaucratic change, there's the risk of designing new structures for problem sets that are themselves constantly evolving and mutating.

    All of which leads me to want to look at this very much from the bottom up: what is being done now, or is needed now, that current doctrine, capabilities, or structures don't address? (Related to that--do we really agree what what's lacking now, against current or foreseeable future challenges?)

  2. #2
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Good post. With respect to your final

    parenthetical comment, I'm not at all comfortable we have much of a clue as to future challenges and our impatience to reorganize today to meet yesterdays challenge sort of concerns me...
    Last edited by Ken White; 11-04-2007 at 05:01 AM. Reason: Typo

  3. #3
    Council Member Rob Thornton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Fort Leavenworth, KS
    Posts
    1,510

    Default That is probably where we should start

    by considering the so what. That is what got me thinking about Killcullen's blog post - how do we see (collectively) the 21st Century unfolding - how do you get it more right then wrong?

    From Ken:
    I'm not at all comfortable we have much of a clue as to future challenges and our impatience to reorganize today to meet yesterdays challenge sort of concerns me...
    From Rex:
    All of which leads me to want to look at this very much from the bottom up: what is being done now, or is needed now, that current doctrine, capabilities, or structures don't address? (Related to that--do we really agree what what's lacking now, against current or foreseeable future challenges?)
    I agree - I'm not sure we've had our feet under us very well when it comes to understanding how/if the world is different, how our friends see us/if that matters/what could we do to make it better/why should we do it. I'm not sure we understand the enemy -even from the point of agreeing on who the real enemy is from a global perspective that allows some focused thinking - what is that enemy (insert menu depending on your view) trying to accomplish with regards to himself and with regard to us and with regard to others?

    My sense is we're having a hard time deciding who we want or need to be - did we change, or are we the same, but just forgot for awhile? Until we decide that one - our friends are going to look at us a little funny, and our enemies might misinterpret our actions/inactions on matters or slide one past us.

    I think we are starting to come out of though. That we're asking questions about ourselves, and are tired of using the words - gray, ambiguous, nebulous, unclear and other words that followed 9/11 when the emphasis swung to passion's corner seems to me that we might be getting a sense of self and the world.

    Until we get some consensus built on how know yourself (our government,the domestic population, the Inter-Agency,etc.), know the enemy (from state to non-state; pandemics to the effects of global warming), know the terrain (friends, trading partners, allies, neutrals, peers, everyone not currently the enemy) it will be hard.

    I'll be off the net most of the day - got to play catch up on all the things I'm supposed to be doing, but didn't yesterday Best, Rob

  4. #4
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,188

    Default A Real Bump On the Bell Curve

    I tossed the bones and it shows alotta' small wars and petty dictatorships - scarce resources fueling the former and lots of take-offs on established religions jusifying the latter - a real bump on the bell curve - extra smart missles and fast-moving, very autonomous, almost independent small units are seen in the bone pattern - they show an External Affairs Cabinet aka the Dirty Works Dept. with State pretty much muzzled from trying to foist notions of democracy on primitive people

  5. #5
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Thumbs up I suspect you and the bones are correct...

    Where's Matt Helm when we need him...

    Now, to train and unleash the Rambos.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •