Quote Originally Posted by Bill Moore View Post
Frequently the reality to the host nation is that we're bullying our way in, we're assaulting their culture, and we're condescending. Determining how we assist to avoid these perceptions is as important as the amount of assistance we provide.
I would agree, it certainly adds to the frictions we face and does not help with accomplishing our objectives (short or long term).

Quote Originally Posted by Bill Moore View Post
When we say war is war, we mean destroying the enemy directly in combat. It should be that simple, but unfortunately it isn't.
My biology teachers taught me about some of the slow motion wars conducted by plants which have influenced my thinking. Use of shade, alkaloids in the soils to limit others, rapid growth, different types of photosynthesis, etc. evolved over long periods of time and allow different communities to obtain sufficient resources for their distinct systems while ensuring that other systems do not limit their needs...extinction does occur but there is a lot of living that goes on before that happens and I think there are many parallels to what we see...

Quote Originally Posted by Bill Moore View Post
IMHO GEN Powell had good intentions (it is called the Powell doctrine, but several Vietnam Vets contributed to its development), but a doctrine that ignores reality is simply not functional. Despite howls of protest from the military we got involves in Bosnia and Kosavo, Somalia, stayed in Afghanistan after routing the Taliban and Al Qaeda, and the list goes on. How can the Powell doctrine be considered feasible as a guiding light for our military?
SF, CA, FAO, GPF, and the many different interagency types are testament to the fact that although the Powell/? doctrine is sometimes desired, it does not fully address the realities of a very complex world.

There are alot of sharp people out there with good networks and insights