Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
Perhaps we can now return to Tristan's thread which was:

I think the more important question is should we engage in counterinsurgency operations given Tristan's parameters and I would answer no, we should not.

However, to the question asked, I agree with Nagl, yes, it is possible.
I wonder however what you think of the particular issues that I perceive support it.

1- Probably most predictable reason we shouldn't do it is because in order to conduct a counterinsurgency other than at home you have to pick sides.
(Historically we haven't been very adept at doing that, as you and others have often pointed out.)

2- (This one is more touchy but seems just as relevant) Because in the end a lot of what your doing does have to do with learning how to "control" populations in one form or another, one might say that at some point it gets more notice at home than it should.

By this I mean people expect SWAT teams to practice breaking down doors, they expect NGO's and Emergency organizations to practice doing what they do. This same population however may see military learning how to do all these things better in a relatively scewed light by the time it filters back through the layers of media, academia, and just personal networks.

Regardless of the fact that in order to do what we're doing well we have to learn it this still may be a contributing factor to some of the "larger societal grumblings one deals with throughout international and local policy/Path discussions.

Note: If this seems rather far fetched for Americans to be worried about than fine, instead consider many of the other governments currently involved and how some of their societies may view it in relation with their historical experiences.