Actually Pete... This is a direct paste from Ricks piece on-line...

"There was a time a couple of decades ago when theArmy's Training and DoctrineCommand was an intellectual powerhouse, leading the way in rebuilding thepost-Vietnam Army. But in recent years, it hasn't been clear to me what it isdoing down there on Ft. Monroe. I mean, in interviews I did for The Gamble about how the counterinsurgency manual was written, TRADOC didn't come up much -- and when it did, it was portrayed as a minor obstacle.

I was thinking about this because I was just reading the text of a speech Gen. Martin Dempsey, current commander of TRADOC, gave at a meeting of the Army association in DC in October. His bottom line is fine withme -- yes, got it, adaptability is key for the future of the service -- but the points he makes getting there are just intellectually sloppy."

With regards to...

"The reason I mentioned FM 3-24 is because I suspect there's a reluctance within the Army to consider converting two or three active duty mech infantry divisions to a lighter TOE more suitable for COIN operations. Some company grade officers have also remarked that the COIN instruction at the branch basic and career courses isn't that great.


As for the areas your bring up...

The idea of devoting/specializing/converting 2-3 divisions to a light MTOE for COIN operations is a little baffling, don't think anyone is seriously considering this for several reasons, the most important may be that some of our best "COIN" commanders thus far have been CAV officers/tankers... converting a unit heavy to light does not make it a COIN force

as for the instruction... absolutely correct, although I'd argue its improved to some extent, great article on the topic... that I'd bet has made its way into Dempsey's inbox... was published in SWJ BLOG here...

http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...highlight=COIN

By the way the author of that piece spent the last 2.5 years fighting the good fight to improve COIN integration/inclusion in LDE

Live well and row