Quote Originally Posted by William F. Owen View Post
Why do you want academic soft sciences in the field? Didn't need them before. Their engagement gets them money, so I guess they're happy.
But prior to 1969 or so, academic soft sciences WERE major contributors to military efforts. Pigeon-guided bombs, anyone?

How do you know what has merit in future conflict? What you do know, is discernible from past conflict. HTTs did not figure in any of the previous COIN conflicts. From all I have read, I see HTTs being a targeting and information gathering asset. Ethnography is information and it is put to military use, which should, when required, mean the use of lethal force.
That is not something civilians should be doing.
We embed civilian journalists in military units, don't we? And I think it is short-sighted to view HTTs as targeting assets. Where intel weenies decide which doors to kick down, HTTs should be advising commanders on why they shouldn't kick down the door in the first place.

The military commander is pre-loaded to go after that weapons cache; maybe we need someone who is politically astute to explain to the military types that one military cache will not win or lose the war. But kicking down doors MAY lose it. And, frankly, HTTs become more of a POLAD than anything else, pushed down to the lower levels.

HTTs are also useful in teaching lower level soldiers on what to look for, beyond the "don't stare at their women and don't shake with the left hand" thing.