The author presents two critiques of King's (2010) examination of U.S. military social influence activities. The first concerns her discussion of five competing conceptions of the relationship between social influence and war. It is proposed that the views presented are in fact complementary but also difficult to compare because they reflect different issues. The second critique concerns King's failure to discuss how behavioral scientists might contribute to the area. It is proposed that significant contributions could be made in assisting the military with validation studies that assess the effectiveness of influence techniques, training, and achieving desired effects.