Gentlemen,

As we sort through and debate the merits of Niel’s work in academic terms of methodology, scope, and inference, I think y’all (wise old sages that you are in both word and deed) have missed the intent of Niel’s voice, his attempt to articulate his struggle on how to command his boys in a complex insurgency contrasted with his internal voices echoed from his first platoon sergeant in his tank company explaining how to beat the Krasnovians at NTC-combined arms, shock and awe, etc…

Niel’s article speaks for my generation of officers muddling through what seemed like a “new” form of warfare to us. We did not grow up with the mentorship of Vietnam vets in our outfits. We studied the “real” battlefields of the Fulda Gap.

In a sense, we were running backs focused on debating the merits of the “in and out” offense. Should we run directly up the middle or sweep outside? We measured success in terms of our yards per carry, perfecting the guard or tackle pull, and getting bigger, faster, and stronger. Creativity and innovation came with counters, options, and tight-end motions. In reality, executing a perfect tank gunnery or navigating through a successful NTC rotation was our Superbowl- how seemingly trivial in today's world. We busied ourselves with concern over uniform standards, minimizing DUI's, and carefully choreographing our USR scores.

Dusting off a Krepenivich or Galula book was like discovering a passing game. You mean the quarterback can throw the ball??? WTF??? First, we were mad at ourselves for not thinking about it first. Second, we were immensely frustrated to find out that this passing game had been around for hundreds of years. Why didn’t our coach tell us about this???

So now we’re discovering the passing game. From our perspective, some would prefer to transition to an all passing game while others would like to stick to an all ground game. I applaud COL Gentile, John Nagl, and Rob Thorton’s efforts at promoting a mixture of a ground and air game.

I can’t speak for all my peers, but I simply want to play football.

Personally, as I reflect on my time in Iraq in varying rank, leadership roles, and responsibilities, I’m comforted in reading about those that came before me and experienced similar highs and lows, horrific tragedies, and small measures of victory. In Bob Andrew’s Village Wars, I could literally see what was going to happen as I turned page after page b/c the tactics used by the Communist in Vietnam to control the rural landscape was hauntingly similar to what I observed the Islamic State of Iraq apply in the far outskirts of Diyala Province. In Donovan’s Once a Warrior King, I listen to a man purging his soul of his actions, and I know that I’m not the only one that dealt with circumstances where bad leaders caused good men to die or the frustrations and joy of advising a foreign army. In Lansdale, Galula, Behind the Burma Road, the 1962 COIN symposium, etc, I read countless tales of lessons I relearned forty, fifty, and sixty years later. In studying Plan Columbia or El Salvador, I take away other examples.

From SWJ, I absorb the passionate intensity of soldiers and citizens that care and are 1. Trying to find ways to understand the complex problems facing today’s world and 2. Find creative and innovative solutions.

What does all this mean? I dunno. I know that I have a lot to learn.

Maybe we'll find a good mixture of run versus pass. Maybe we'll find answers. Maybe we'll gain something approaching wisdom.

I just wanna play football. I can run and I can pass- just put me in the game coach.

I just wish I was a more diligent student of history in my younger years.

v/r
Mike