Hi Gian !
I fully concur; Colin’s piece deserves much more than two drive-bys. Mr. Peters would have been better served by introducing himself (which was requested and subsequently ignored).

There is however a good point herein that several individuals more than adequately addressed regarding so-called experts.

RTK’s post is food for thought, and one I can completely related to. I would add the caveat that ‘academically or documented’ experts are little more than ‘subject matter’ experts. I don’t fully agree that one should have boots on the ground for millenniums in order to be considered an expert (there), but it certainly doesn’t hurt to have those years (there on the ground) when all is said and done.


Quote Originally Posted by RTK View Post
I think there's a fine line between experts and people that think they know what they're doing. Further, I think this applies to any discipline or field of study.

For instance, as an instructor of reconnaissance tactics, I probably have more knowledge in the field of study than 99% of the Army. That doesn't mean I know 99% of what there is to know about reconnaissance.
I do have one comment in closing however. An individual with no military background simply cannot (in any way shape or form) relate to or conclude something was ‘fumbled or messed up’ during a firefight, massive refugee crisis, social and political upheaval, or overtaking an enemy position.

Regards, Stan