Quote Originally Posted by Gian P Gentile View Post
There are limits some times to what a military force can accomplish in a counterinsurgency operation; even one armed with the best counterinsurgency doctrine available and a trained counterinsurgency force winning—in all of its domestic political, international, and operational context--may be beyond its means and that should be acknowledged up front in a manual to policy makers on this subject. I imagine that the atmosphere of this conference will be drunk with success from the Surge and the idea that these things are doable if we just get the right doctrine and force on board.
Totally agree with the thrust. In regard to the last sentence, I'd hope not on the drunk with success part and surely they won't succumb to believe that's all it takes for success -- and, conversely will acknowledge that these things are doable. Difficult, eminently dislikeable, to be avoided if at all possible but if not, doable.

Coin is not “armed politics.” If it were then we would have politicians doing Coin with guns. We don’t. Instead they are conducted by soldiers and marines with guns. A big and important difference that unfortunately clever little cliché’s like “armed politics” helps to cloud and make unclear. In fact the term “armed politics” conceals the reality of Coin which fundamentally is one of death, destruction, and fighting.
Also true -- though I'd suggest the reality is even more than just killing and dying. Still your point is valid, that death, destruction and fighting are usually going to be required and the policy makers and deciders need to know and acknowledge that up front. They also need to worst case those effects else they'll make a dumb decision.

Finally, I disagree with the straw-man approach under the theory section that poses two theories for Coin: enemy centric and population centric. Coin is more complicated than this binary conception. By rendering counterinsurgency into a population-centric construct the manual removes the enemy from the equation and therefore turns Coin into something it is not. In fact by removing the enemy as the center of focus the manual actually removes the element of friction from war too. So for policy makers who read this manual a series of scientific processes, coordinated through the interagency process, can be applied to secure the population and improve their lives thereby winning their hearts and minds. Coin for policy makers now becomes a relatively simple matter of inter-agency coordination, applied scientific processes across a set of lines of operations.
Agreed. It ain't that easy...

Beware; we are in the grips of armed social scientists.
Heh, true -- and in my observation, have been since the early 60s...