Blending into the mindset of the Human Terrain

[Tom Odom]

Here is a constructive piece of advice:

Simply expressing old ideas in new terms is an old technique that many of us have seen time and time again. Try using plain English versus:

• Non-kinetic modular elements
  
• (semi) (non) permissive environment
  
• Military as core buzz word
  
• Shape the environment, not destroy it

Those will simply get you tossed from the TOC

And finally try not lecturing the reader because you are not communicating effectively as in

Try to read and understand the things you like to refer to as "newfangled talk" first.

Tom

[William F. Owen]

Perhaps, but clarity in communication is also important. It ensures that your message isn't lost or garbled. It also prevents us from wrapping the same old smelly fish in new newsprint and trying to pass it off as the catch of the day. I think that's what Wilf thinks some of this "newfangled talk" is doing, and in some ways he may be correct.

Said better than I ever could... or did.

Here is a constructive piece of advice:

Simply expressing old ideas in new terms is an old technique that many of us have seen time and time again. Try using plain English versus:

• Non-kinetic modular elements
  
• (semi) (non) permissive environment
  
• Military as core buzz word
  
• Shape the environment, not destroy it

Those will simply get you tossed from the TOC

And finally try not lecturing the reader...

... and the only thing about war that is changing, is Tom and I are agreeing more often!

Again, Tom said it better than I did. If someone can't describe a military concept or operation, using words and expressions that an officer from 60 years ago would not understand then it should set the BS detector well into the red.

We might all be better served if we stopped using silly words like "human terrain," - do we mean population? Let's say population then. Let's start speaking real English, and stop BS'ing.

[Van]

Simply expressing old ideas in new terms is an old technique that many of us have seen time and time again. Try using plain English ...

And finally try not lecturing the reader because you are not communicating effectively...

Well said, thank you, Tom.


Coined,
I am not saying that you are uninformed, but your text is similar to that of people who have read a recent article or book, but haven't developed an understanding of the historical precedents behind the emerging ideas. The down side of all the buzz words and new constructions is that, for example, people will be so distracted by trying to figure out what a

(non)kinetic organized unit

is, that they'll miss that this is an effort to bring back the COHORT concept (which I support).

Through interaction more sub effects and indicators will be derived from the Lines of Operation. "Out of the box" thinking will have to be encouraged at the expense of stove pipes, "fenced domains", personalities and comfort zones.

Just like in Truppenführung, HeeresDienstVorschrift 300, 1933.

Maneuver elements will “social patrol” a part of the town,

Just like in the USMC Small Wars Manual, 1940.

Imo the potential conflict arena for the coming ten years stretches between the republics bordering Russia via Eur Asia, the ME to Africa.

And this is the one place where I disagree. Yes, these are potential conflict areas, but, at least in the U.S., we've planned and trained for the 'right' war once in our history (Iraq 2003), and even then we only thought halfway through what needed to happen. I would argue that flexibility and adaptability must be our watch words, lest we end up with soldiers in desert camouflage fighting in the mountains of Peru.

[Coined]

And this is the one place where I disagree. Yes, these are potential conflict areas, but, at least in the U.S., we've planned and trained for the 'right' war once in our history (Iraq 2003), and even then we only thought halfway through what needed to happen. I would argue that flexibility and adaptability must be our watch words, lest we end up with soldiers in desert camouflage fighting in the mountains of Peru.

"right war"?? Hmm ... short term memory!!
Btw, smart bombs did the trick ... and after "victory" the real #### came along.

Hey, William and Tom .... your reality still is a reflection of your own shadows.
Well, at least the two of you agree ...

Nice approach you all show, if you don't get ... slaughter it ...

[marct]

Nice approach you all show, if you don't get ... slaughter it ...

Rather gratuitous, don't you think? One could also say "If you don't know about it, invent new words to describe old concepts." This post-modern trend is quite distressing both in general society and in academia. It is also, IMHO, correlated rather strongly with ad hominem attacks on people who disagree with the "new, bright shiny penny".

[William F. Owen]

Hey, William and Tom .... your reality still is a reflection of your own shadows.
Well, at least the two of you agree ...

Nice approach you all show, if you don't get ... slaughter it ...

Well that may indeed be true, but please show us some evidence. So far you have just presented a set of opinions, that are by no means clear.

This forum tends to subject ideas to rigour. If you can't explain it clearly, then no progress will be made.

For example, what does

Through interaction more sub effects and indicators will be derived from the Lines of Operation.

actually mean?

What is a "sub-effect"? The result of a "sub-action" or a second order effect? Ball is in your court.

[Coined]

What is a "sub-effect"? The result of a "sub-action" or a second order effect? Ball is in your court.

If it is all old news, why then do we still follow the "old school", because it is part of our comfortzone??

By the way, the ball is in OUR court!!

[Cavguy]

Coined,

Why is the new better? Tom, Wilf, Steve, and Van have articulated reasonable responses. Between them is a huge amount of military and combat experience in high and low intensity conflict.

While there are new aspects to the current environment, the fundamental nature, and how to counter it, is thousands of years old.

Rather than reinventing terms, we need to read our history. Guerrilla war is not a new concept. Most of our failures result from a lack of understanding of the basic concept of it, not a lack of new systems.

A smart man named Robert Asprey wrote a two volume series entitled "War in the Shadows" , which is a chronology of insurgency over the past 3000 years. His point was to demonstrate to people that insurgency was not a new concept.

I went back searching for your personal or professional expertise on COIN, or executing it. Please inform us of how you are so certain your proposals would work, in practice.

Finally, I know you are communicating in a second language, so I appreciate how difficult it is to express things accurately.

[Ken White]

I did not comment on your initial post in this thread because in my opinion it said nothing. Others have commented and, essentially, expressed the thought that you really said nothing new -- and your response to that is to provide short, snippy comments that essentially do not seem communicate your thoughts at all well. I suggest that if six people -- and I make seven -- have said that your point is not well understood, then perhaps you should look at what you are trying to accomplish and rephrase significantly some of your more pithy comments.

For example

If it is all old news, why then do we still follow the "old school", because it is part of our comfortzone??

Because Armies, Nations and People (as a group) all change slowly. New ideas get adopted as they appear and if they seem to make sense. People frequently will learn new things and use them but succeeding generations discard those things as irrelevant -- then a new crisis appears and things get 'rediscovered' and eventually get embedded as standard practice.

The world has been operating in that fashion for thousands of years and that is unlikely to change. So, yes, the comfort zone aspect is part of it, National psyches and penchants are part of it, the dynamics of situations are part of it -- and human fallibility is involved in all those . Also involved are group dynamics

Only the young who have no use for history don't know all that -- or pretend as if they do not.

By the way, the ball is in OUR court!!

What does this mean. Specifically:

Of what Ball are you speaking, that is what specifically do you think should be done?

Follow on questions:

Is anyone doing or trying to do what you think should be done? If yes, who and how successfully? If not, who and why not?

[MikeF]

For the link to Asprey's book. At least I got something out of this thread besides a headache

Coined, welcome. Please don't upset the old men...They tend to get grumpy. I think you have some excellent points to make, but I would ask you not to attack the members of this group. We merely implement policy.

Just say what you mean and mean what you say.

Ken, have you seen my baseball?

v/r

Mike

[Van]

we've planned and trained for the 'right' war once in our history (Iraq 2003),

"right war"?? Hmm ... short term memory!!
Btw, smart bombs did the trick ... and after "victory" the real #### came along.

"Right" as in "the war we really we going to fight rather than the war would would like to fight"

And smart bombs did not do the trick, no matter how much they helped. The political endstate that military action was supporting was "regime change", and that came about due to the ground operations. Whether or not "regime change" was the ideal solution is for politicians to decide, not soldiers.

Nice approach you all show, if you don't get ... slaughter it ...

"Ignoratio elenchu"; ignoring the main point of our arguments and shifting to different point? Or would this be "ad hominem"; criticizing us rather than either accepting or rebutting our points?

Your hand is shown. Good day, sir.

P.S.

Please don't upset the old men...They tend to get grumpy.

Another crack like that and I'll thrash you with my walking stick
V

[Tom Odom]

"right war"?? Hmm ... short term memory!!
Btw, smart bombs did the trick ... and after "victory" the real #### came along.

Hey, William and Tom .... your reality still is a reflection of your own shadows.
Well, at least the two of you agree ...

Nice approach you all show, if you don't get ... slaughter it ...

Me and my shadow....

Dancing down the avenue...

In Baghdad

Tom