Quote Originally Posted by Tom Odom View Post
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.