ML:

From inception, and throughout, the mistake that identifying human dynamic factors was the same as discovering On/Off switches and control dials was to dismiss foreign and enemy publics as something less complex and dynamic than our own electorate.

There is a very big conceptual gap between Big Government/Nations actors/organizations and those of Little Government/Local Governance that seems insurmountable under present structures.

Folks who live far away from a local consequence are more likely to support something with significant local impacts. The perceived impacts, at the local level, are area and impact-specific.

Terrain is the ground on which events occur. Terrain can shape and influence events, but only the actors and drive the events.

The silly notion that we are trying to "shape" terrain/events fails to appreciate the exigencies/realities of CT/COIN in a conflict/post-conflict environment.

In a conflict/post-conflict environment, a deployed and engaged military is not and "influencer" or shaper, except at the risk of falling to its own propaganda.

Occupy, dominate, control as long as is needed. Then build relationships, transitions.

Get over the notion that "wars" and "enemies" can be influenced, shaped, or PR-ed out of existence. Or that we can transition before we occuy, domonate, control.

Not doing so is as dangerous to mission, and soldiers as it is to the subject population.