Bill Moore:
We didn't get in this Iraq and Afghanistan initially, instead we focused heavily on the singular objective of head hunting HVIs, and too slowly we learned that it didn't work as a stand alone activity.

... the theory was if you eliminated a key node or two the network would collapse and you could go home victoriouly. We should continue to do this, but this is not decisive (conventional warriors think it is).
Seems to me the first quoted statment is correct but since that was a SOCOM idea, it sort of reinforces the thought in the second item but seems that UNconventional warriors also give nodes more credence than they deserve...
... The so called indirect approach assumes the world will be our surrogates and will fight for our national interests (mercenaries may, not others), but the reality is that the indirect approach only works in situations where we have mutual interests.
That's not my understanding of an Indirect Approach. Indirect Approach is a strategy that simply advocates an advance along the line / attack / focus on the line or point of greatest expectation of least resistance. (LINK). I guess there are people who expect the world will be surrogates but I've never met any...

Pat Lang via Mike F:
" - For the counterinsurgent the commitment of forces must necessarily be much larger than for the insurgents. The counterinsurgent seeks to protect massive areas, hundreds of built up areas and millions of people. The insurgent can pick his targets. The difference in force requirements is crippling to the counterinsurgents."
I just picked that one but all his objections are short sighted or poorly stated -- they're somewhat true in the current situation but are generally only correct if the major flaw of committing the GPF to that sort of mission occurs. If judicious use of effective intelligence information, diplomacy and SF in small quantities early on cannot creating a true host nation COIN effort to forestall or defuse a situation in a Country of interest; the options then become Clandestine action, overt Strategic Raids, escalation to full scale war or third party GPF 'COIN' efforts like those of which he writes.

Of the four choices, the latter should ALWAYS be the last...