Posted by Surferbeetle

The general point I was/am attempting to make is that economics are an inseparable component of human wars. From this it follows that victors of wars understand how to use economics to further their aims, and that the use of economics has both destructive and constructive components which need to be trained upon.
In any social system there is an ecomonic system, just as in any biological organism there is an energy system to sustain life processes. Yet I stand firm, unless convinced with strong logical arguments, that is not the same as the USG blindly "attempting" to economic development to undermine an insurgent movement. If economic development is even required, then it needs to be focused on supporting the political objective. The other side gets that, Hezbollah are good at, LeT is good at it, and some communist insurgencies have had some success. The issue isn't whether it is important or not, in some cases it is, in others it isn't. Blanket statements and templated approaches are dangerous.

Being able to successfully execute a campaign comprised of simultaneous efforts synchronized toward common objectives is the result of intensive training. How often does the GPF train on how to use economics as part of a campaign? How about SOF?
This one is easy, we give classes on DIME (or DIMEFIL), then after class we complain about the lack of an integrated whole of government approach.