Hi Bob,

Most of what you say, snarkiness included , I agree with. I do, however, have a bit of a problem with this:

Quote Originally Posted by Bob's World View Post
(Besides, we aren't doing COIN in Afghanistan, its FID. Until we can identify the mission correctly, it stands to reason that the plan to execute it might be a bit off. Oh, and I would also suggest to the boss to change the criteria for AQ from "Defeat" to "Neutralize," as the pursuit of defeat brings far too many negative 2nd and 3rd order effects and is not necessary to achieve the ends of making America safe.)
I used to argue that Afghanistan was FID / SFA, but I am now really having second (and third) doubts. FID (and SFA) seem to imply two criteria that I believe are missing from the current situation:

  1. a (locally) "valid" (however we want to define it) HN government; i.e. one that s/b able to stand up without massive external support and resources, and
  2. a situation where the HN government actually has some measure of control over the ROE.

Honestly, I don't really see either of these implied conditions being met, so I don't see how we can be said to actually be "doing" FID (or SFA). I don't think we have a decent alphabet soup acronym for this situation. What do we call it? Military-based social engineering on the cheap (MBSEC)?