Here are some of my thoughts on points raised so far. Far from the last word. Most importantly, in some cases I'm sharing a theory and at issue is how practice has departed from, or will depart, from the theory.
For background on the current macro approach and commentary on things that belong in multiple places -- see this FAQ.
Global Commons --
An important set of topics. It was very much behind the Global Issues & Threats section at the top of the regional conflicts section. Perhaps we could expand the description of the forum. Some of the topics may fit more nicely in some of the participant/stakeholder forums (assuming we keep those).
Red Team --
As mentioned, aligns with the Adversary/Threat forum. Also any real region-specific discussion would make a lot of sense in the regional forum.
Participants & Stakeholders consolidation --
Perhaps. Or may be a key to expansion and better serving a broader audience (see Bill Moore discussion in post #10). I really don't know. The real outliers I see at the moment are the Military Art & Science section which I think could combine some elements into the Participants & Stakeholders section and do away with others.
Conflict Resolution --
Important topic. I'm not sure how that makes sense as a forum that is distinct from a conflict-specific thread in a regions forum (my first reaction); a stakeholder-specific domain or a grand strategy area (TBD?); or a series of forums (not on my short list, but?) re different phases from pre-hostility through resolution and maintaining the peace (or non-war). Would love to hear more.
Coalition Speaks --
I agree with Jedburgh in the sense that everything is or should be coalition and we have perhaps evolved to be less US-centric than we feared, but also with others that there is still plenty of US-dominance in the Council. I do not like the idea of herding non-US perspectives or non-US news into one forum, it belongs everywhere. When formed, the idea of the forum was to provide a spot to remind US to practice what we preach regarding broader perspectives and to discuss US-centricity. It hasn't really emerged that way in practice, for whatever reason.
Region Refresh
Absolutely needed. Especially OIF / OEF weigthing.
IW slicing and dicing
StabOps, UW, CT, COIN, FID, etc. -- I think we've got a heck of a job as a community keeping up with our own terminology and with the utility of applying it in practice. There's a whole theory and doctrine discussion that could backstop any of those terms and make a mixing bowl of all of them. I don't see forum organization along those lines being fruitful. I do, however, think we might make some hay out of cleaning up the theorists & doctrine/TTP sections.
Thinking vs doing
Whatever method there is to our madness (again, see here), we must do a good job of communicating it and still have modest expectations for a) just how understandable it is; b) just how useful it is even when understood.
Pete, if you can figure out how to make room service or take out work for the Kitakidogo Social Club, you will be our next hero.
Bookmarks