Yes, and "kinetic" was a perfectly well-defined physical term until it was turned into a military buzzword. I don't care about non-military, non-security meanings. This is about national security stuff, and I am obviously convinced that "resilience" is a useless buzzword in national security affairs.
You didn't meet my challenge anyway.
Repeat:
So what could the citizens or bureaucrats learn by studying resilience theory about preparing themselves better for the next disaster?I challenge you to name one instance where "resilience" as a concept helps to gain an insight that isn't already covered by conventional means.
I say: Nothing.
Most citizens of New Orleans fled or became egoistic (on the level of families). The failure can easily be explained with the well-established military term of cohesion.
Even IF the disaster example was helpful to military theory (and I don't think it is, except probably for irregulars); military theory has already a much better, less vague term that points directly at the point of failure instead of being named for a desirable end-state.
Bookmarks