Another collage trained warrior one who never saw a day outside of collage or Washington DC don’t know why this guy bugs me but God bless and protect all our people in harms way where ever they are. Merry Christmas Pro Deo et Patria
I am really glad the art of following Maslow Heiarchy of needs is now being implemented for the sake of our military and the IRAQ' People. Its now time to provide those needs that every civil nation desires. I believe that our military men and women on the ground can attest to that better than any newscaster or politician in our nation. God bless to all of our veterans and civilian counterparts and we are all very proud of your success of improving some of the IRAQ peoples lives. Thank You
I'm always amazed at how many fools here dismiss Lind just because he has never worn a uniform. The last person to do that to his face at Quantico was ripped to pieces.
Originally posted by LordBest: I'm always amazed at how many fools here dismiss Lind just because he has never worn a uniform. The last person to do that to his face at Quantico was ripped to pieces.
If you never lived it you don’t know what you are talking about, the fact he studied it does not change the fact he is not a military man and never will be, for at some point you must be willing to put your own life on the line to consider others before self and all the education in the world will not change that. God bless and protect all our people in harms way where ever they are. Happy New Year Pro Deo et Patria
You are of course absolutely wrong. To be a true strategic and operational thinker it is best if one is isolated from the tactical element in order to avoid distraction by danger or petty heroics, or indeed excessive sentiment.
Children all think they have the answers, which is fine as long as life never challenges them LordBest please do us all a favor and stay as far from military life as possible I would hate for you to actually learn something. If you are actually an analyzer please know we do appreciate you guys in time all that BS make it down to us and you never know when you will need an emergency supply of TP. As for Lind please believe me when I tell you that any military man might listen to him politely, it is something we learn to do in BMT but he will never respect him as a military leader OUT. God bless and protect all our people in harms way where ever they are. Happy New Year Pro Deo et Patria
Spare us from little boys who think being shot at gives them superior knowledge about strategy and operations. Actually, that is far too mean. I do not mean to imply that you fighting chaps do not have anything to offer, I think it would be nice if you remembered that the chaps who sit down and read military history and what people have done right and wrong also have much to offer, instead of just dismissing it because we/they haven't been shot at. Out of interest, has anyone ehre actually ATTENDED a Lind lecture at Quantico? The man listens, explains, takes feedback, he even invites some of the chaps around to his home to discuss these matters in informal symposia, and makes a special effort to discuss the latest developments on the ground with chaps who have returned from Iraq and Afghanistan.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: LordBest,
This is cheap debate strategy...don't knock the ideas, but knock the person. Why is Lind wrong because he hasn't served? By that logic, anybody who has no military service shouldn't have anything to do with strategy. It's wrong and simply unconstitutional. Frankly, our military is designed to fight the Soviets, not an insurgency. So maybe people who've been trained to fight conventional warfare their whole careers oughta pay attention to someone who studies modern warfare.
Since you are in the USAF I will answer you by now you have received some training maybe even NCO academy, all great leaders believed in a well rounded solder. To be able to read and write not just of war but poetry and history, to know offence and defense, to be experienced and well rounded, at one time we expected this just of officers but if you expect to make it above Msgt you must learn it to. Now we come to Mr Lind everything he knows he has learned from others he has no practical experience nor the passion or drive to acquire as you have done. Do you honestly believe you could walk into a shop outside your AFSC and handle it even if you have been through the school and 5 and 7 level courses you still don’t have the practical experience to run the shop unless you have worked in the field, but that is exactly what he is stating and it is not possible. Even at the highest levels you must have a working understanding of what you are talking about where the consequences of a bad decision are something you can see and touch and that you have to live with something he will never do. If you are not answered maybe you chose the wrong path for to me ours is not a job it is a way of life. God bless and protect all our people in harms way where ever they are. Pro Deo et Patria
Who says that Lind is a leader of people? Who says that he is the one making decisions? That's what the generals are for. They are expected to have a broad knowledge of all things military, with a focus on strategy. And these generals don't operate in a vacuum; just look at all the civilians in the Pentagon. Heck, the POTUS and SECDEF are civilians, and that is very intentional. Military service is not required, nor should it be, for a good idea to be a good idea.
Don't mistake tactical knowledge with historical and strategic. Let's suppose we have a terrific Corporal who excels in his duties, walking the streets of Fallujah. He's been in horrific firefights and knows everything you need to know about how to survive and win a tactical engagement. Now remove him from the streets, put him in the Pentagon, and tell him to eradicate the insurgency. Why is he qualified for this job? Because he's been shot at? He would do well to consider the ideas of someone like Lind, whose job is to study the nature of an insurgency, why it exists and what can defeat it. Wouldn't it be fair to say that the Corporal's perspective is one of tactical know-how, but a wider knowledge is needed at the top level?
Think-tank people like Lind are the ones who would look at Vietnam and examine why we lost. They figure out how we tried to fight the enemy by our rules and goals, and lost because the enemy fought with methods that actually worked. This is the knowledge that the bigwigs didn't want to apply in Iraq. We were on the same path in Iraq until recently, because of a senior leader who understood that this isn't WWII, and a bad enough situation that the White House allowed things to change.
Lind isn't telling junior Marines how to blow up the enemy. What the hell does he know about that: nothing. He's telling their bosses that the heavy firepower isn't always the right answer in this kind of war, and he has the historical knowledge to back it up. Dismissing his strategic- and operational-level ideas because he hasn't been shot at on the tactical level is absurd.
And out of curiosity, what is he wrong about? Change "Mister" to "General" Lind and then tell me why he's full of it.
I have tried A fool cannot be protected from his folly. If you attempt to do so, you will not only arouse his animosity but also you will be attempting to deprive him of whatever benefit he is capable of deriving from experience. Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.
God bless and protect all our people in harms way where ever they are. Pro Deo et Patria
Originally posted by forgodandcountrysbc: I have tried "A fool cannot be protected from his folly. If you attempt to do so, you will not only arouse his animosity but also you will be attempting to deprive him of whatever benefit he is capable of deriving from experience. Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig."
God bless and protect all our people in harms way where ever they are. Pro Deo et Patria
Exactly, Look take a copy of this to your CO or 1st Shirt and talk it over with them or at least reread the first two chapters of your PFE manual, I am too old to hold your hand, if you are what you say you are you should understand. OUT God bless and protect all our people in harms way where ever they are. Pro Deo et Patria
You're too old to hold my hand? Wonderful. Instead of actually engaging in the debate, you patronize me. Isn't that exactly what I talked about in my original post? Instead of attacking Lind's ideas, you attempt to discredit him--now you're using the same tactic on me. And by clearly avoiding the substance of the debate, you're managing to discredit your own ideas. Good job.
Incidentally, I'd like to know what the "Studying Effectively" and "Enlisted History" chapters of the PDG have to do with this. Or maybe you'll need to clarify which edition of the book you're looking at, that way I'll know where to find info about how to wage a counterinsurgency.
I find it very interesting that Mr. Lind has, at least to my knowledge, never mentioned Roger Trinquier or David Galula. Their writings have been and today are openly available. Roger Tringuier is the writer of: Modern Warfare: A French View of Counterinsurgency and David Galula is the writer of: Counterinsurgency Warfare: Theory and Practice
Between them they had cracked the "DNA" of what is called 4GW years ago. The books were published in the 1960's.
As for strategists not needing military experience that is just pure nonsense. The greatest militarystrategists were all experienced military men: Napoleon, Clausewitz, De Jomini, Mahan, Guderian, Rommel, Mannstein, Zhukov etc. One could go on for ever reciting names.
