I think...
Quote Originally Posted by Rob Thornton View Post
This means until we come to some agreements on ends, ways and means, roles and missions, etc. its may not be a good idea to address the DOTMLPF issues in such a way that become either self constraining, or do not meet the needs of policy.
It has been my observation over the years that we're highly unlikely to ever get such an agreement that has the slightest permanence and therefor lends itself to the coherent development of doctrine -- or even of force structure. The Politicians will always want and get wiggle room barring a major existential threat -- as WW II was perceived to be.

Accordingly, this:
...my sense is they are doing the things they need to be doing based on their mission - e.g. they are writing the doctrine that needs to be written.
is probably as correct as it can be under the circumstances.

As it has generally been and will most likely continue to be...