The American People Don't Like The Terms Of The Iran Deal

[lakedaemonian]

Re: The American People Don't Like The Terms Of The Iran Deal

Haven't you heard? Woods was judged by the star chamber to be a useful fool whose loyalties are suspect.

So put your trust in the cloak and dagger boys. They wouldn't steer you wrong.

Have they ever lied or misled you before? Or put their parochial and bureaucratic interests above the people's.

Why (almost) never!

Just add a few more layers of aluminium foil to keep your ego safe.

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Supporting Israel

Fascinating. I wonder how many (dumb) presidential decision are made in opposition to state department, military, or intelligence experts. I once talked to someone who had an uncle in the CIA. He told me that before the Iraq war, the CIA overwhelmingly did not believe Iraq had WMD.

I don't think it's easy sitting in the executive seat.

Especially if you're surrounded by professional bureaucrats not always acting selflessly in protecting/enhancing their own careers and domains.

While I think history has shown executive leadership has often gone against advice, how often is that advice in the best interest of the country? And how often is that advise lacking in personal risk/commitment and personal political calculation at the senior advisor level?

How often are those senior advisors rising from the trenches of civil service with global coalface experience?

How often are those senior advisors political appointees?

How often is the advice offered to executive leadership lacking special interest pollution?

[Woodsman]

Re: The American People Don't Like The Terms Of The Iran Deal

Just add a few more layers of aluminium foil to keep your ego safe.

Thank you for your self service.

[lakedaemonian]

Re: The American People Don't Like The Terms Of The Iran Deal

Thank you for your self service.

And keep pushing jaded/unbalanced "news" while concurrently warning people about propaganda and information operations. Those little ironic "teachable moments" are increasingly a highlight of my visits here.

I can happily say that's the first(and last) time I've ever typed or spoken the words "teachable moment" that spread like a virus across the planet via mass/social media.

I'm genuinely hoping you'll see the humor and not have some irrational fear that I'm trying to pull some jedi mind trick on you. These aren't the droids you're looking for.

[lektrode]

Re: The American People Don't Like The Terms Of The Iran Deal

.....genuinely hoping you'll see the humor and not have some irrational fear that I'm trying to pull some jedi mind trick on you. These aren't the droids you're looking for.

heheheheh...
+1
but when one happens to have 'been behind enemy lines' like woody has
isnt it all a 'vast right-wing conspiracy' ?

Why (almost) never!

[vt]

Re: Supporting Israel

This is why we should help Israel:

http://www.israel21c.org/technology/...ped-in-israel/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...obel_laureates


This is the one Iranian Nobel prize that was well deserved:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirin_Ebadi

The current Iranian leadership was not happy.

[vt]

Re: The American People Don't Like The Terms Of The Iran Deal

If you remember from some of his posts, Woody was a charter member of the right wing conspiracy around the Nixonian years. He changed his view with a vengeance and now sees his duty to attack any hint of conservative view. Has he joined the left wing conspiracy?

If I post a conservative source, it's the right wing. If I post the New York Times, it's Neocon. Unless it some obscure socialist journal it's all right wing.

Of course we see posts from Russian TV and other supporters of Putin being disseminated in threads on the Ukraine in itulip.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_p...rainian_crisis.

The left wing conspiracy:

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Supporting Israel

This is why we should help Israel:

http://www.israel21c.org/technology/...ped-in-israel/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...obel_laureates


This is the one Iranian Nobel prize that was well deserved:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirin_Ebadi

The current Iranian leadership was not happy.

It's hard to dispute the outsized and various measurable contributions that jews and Israelis haver made to humanity as a whole(staying strictly positive and leaving aside the bits everyone argues about).

Friends and I often debate about how to accurately and realistically measure that "back to the wall" mentality combined with austerity can be a competitive advantage in some cultures/times/places. Necessity being the mother of invention and all that.

The same applies to Iran, particularly Post Revolution.

I don't see Saudi Arabia making cars, or anything of substance for that matter. The sloth of living on top of an endless pile of money.

Meanwhile, Iran is manufacturing large complex indigenous designs across the spectrum(albeit often of 70's/80's western comparison) while under embargo. Where would Iran be today if the last 35 years was rewritten and the Shah still died? Somewhere between Turkey and Germany maybe if under an Iranian Lee Kuan Yew?

One of the most complex aircraft ever made is the Grumman F14, of which Iran was the only export customers(and kept Grumman from going under in the 70's).

The US took the F14 out of service a number of years ago and destroyed spares/machinery/support equipment to avoid it falling into Iranian hands(Iran has aggressively sought parts surrepticiously via blackmarket).

They've figured out how to conduct extremely complex depot level full overhauls on 40 year old aircraft.

Some might laugh....others might notice the creativity that comes from a combination of austerity, necessity, and cultural emphasis on education.

It's ironic to think that in some rough respects, you could frame Iran as a much larger Farsi speaking Israel having partially escaped having been surrounded by mortal enemies and now orientating to newer emerging threats.

In some ways Israel seems to be exhibiting Glenn Close, Fatal Attraction-esque qualities towards it's relationship with US President Michael Douglas.

Now if only I could find the appropriate spurned love to poorly represent Iran.

[shiny!]

Re: Supporting Israel

This is why we should help Israel:

http://www.israel21c.org/technology/...ped-in-israel/

Fascinating list!

A tip for the iTulip community: I can vouch for Sambucol. Works similar to Tamiflu in that it keeps the virus from replicating. Taken at the beginning of the flu it knocks it out. I always keep a few bottles on hand in the cupboard. A few months ago I unsealed a bottle that had expired in 2008. It was still perfect and did the job. Delicious stuff! It isn't homeopathic though; the article got that point wrong. (for some reason lately people are using the word "homeopathic" as a synonym for "herbal remedy") Regardless, the stuff still works great!

[shiny!]

Re: The American People Don't Like The Terms Of The Iran Deal

http://p8.storage.canalblog.com/86/49/353913/77576314_o.jpg[/IMG]

From my quotes file:

"there's 2 kinds of ppl in this world: those who think their opinion is objective truth, and... there's one kinds of ppl in this world"
-Joss Whedon

=======================

"When you believe something, facts become inconvenient obstacles."
Andrew John Hall

[don]

Re: Supporting Israel

Fascinating. I wonder how many (dumb) presidential decision are made in opposition to state department, military, or intelligence experts. I once talked to someone who had an uncle in the CIA. He told me that before the Iraq war, the CIA overwhelmingly did not believe Iraq had WMD.

Before the air campaign, before ground troops were committed, Vietnam was gamed not once but twice. Both times the US could not win. The game, played at the highest levels, was then ignored.

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Supporting Israel

Before the air campaign, before ground troops were committed, Vietnam was gamed not once but twice. Both times the US could not win. The game, played at the highest levels, was then ignored.

Game content and context are quite important.

Having been involved with TEWTS(Tactical Exercise Without Troops), the good guys getting beat up or even losing in early rounds is often a big part of the game intent as folks typically learn far more from getting beat up or losing than winning.

It's a great venue for testing new tactics, training, and procedures, adapting existing ones, and putting commanders under the pump in dealing with not just the expected, but the unexpected.

A few years back there was a TEWTs conducted by the US covering the Persian Gulf with a senior US commander initiating several innovative measures while acting in the role of Iranian commander.

It made the news due to the early "US catastrophe", but also provided the means for US commanders to respond more quickly and effectively to unconventional/asymmetric/unexpected tactics and doctrine.

Where I would question the value of games in the strategic military/geopolitical context would be on conflict duration and the often non-linear nature of many important levers outside of just traditional/conventional conflict.

The longer the conflict, the great the socio-political friction that can weigh on the resilience of a country to conduct a military campaign outside of it's own borders. I would think that would be very, very hard to accurately model due to all of the variables.

What I think is also going to be very hard to model is the increasing use of "hybrid warfare"(which is simply a slightly different recipe of previously utilized and integrated unconventional warfare, political warfare, information warfare, and deception) by major states as seen live in Ukraine and now being initiated in the Baltic States.

So I'm thinking games can theoretically both help predict an inevitable future as well as possibly alter it. But the complexity and longevity of the systems and conflict measured are going to play a significant role in margins of error in predicting the future.

I, for one, reckon end state and exit need to be of reasonably high predictability before any intervention is conducted.

[Woodsman]

Re: Supporting Israel

Before the air campaign, before ground troops were committed, Vietnam was gamed not once but twice. Both times the US could not win. The game, played at the highest levels, was then ignored.

From the popular (if flawed) history of the war by Stanley Karnow:

At a White House reception on Christmas Eve 1963, for example, [President Johnson] told the joint chiefs of staff: "Just let me get elected, and then you can have your war."

Johnson knew it was a disaster in the making, knew it would end badly and went ahead anyway.

https://youtu.be/cM2QTimBoeo

I'm on the fence whether or not Johnson's anguish is genuine. He knew he was being recorded and may have been speaking for the history books. LBJ did after all approve Oplan 34A in 1964 and this was the immediate precursor of the casus belli we came to know as the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. Given Lying Lyndon's history of deception (Box 13), I have serious doubts about his sincerity.

Nixon was worse; he committed treason. We have declassified FBI wiretaps proving that in 1968 Nixon sent Anna Chennault to South Vietnam to secretly urge President Thieu to resist efforts for peace negotiations held by the Johnson administration until Nixon was in the White House.

https://youtu.be/i10VxpAGQUg

Three days before the election, Thieu pulled out of the talks.

So instead of ending in 68/69, the war dragged on until April 75. In the interim, countless thousands were killed and the war was widened with the invasions of Cambodia and Laos; all sacrificed for the benefit of Richard Nixon.

[flintlock]

Re: The American People Don't Like The Terms Of The Iran Deal

I think the use of a radioactive/nuclear terror weapon is nearly inevitable.

I have pretty much come to the same conclusion.

I can fully understand Israel's concern with Iran having nukes. They simply cannot withstand even a single strike. Striking Jerusalem is not necessary so I don't see how that factors into the argument( by others on here) that Iran would not use them if they had them.

People get so caught up in their partisan politics that they fail to consider the ramifications. No country "needs" nuclear weapons. But they are out there unfortunately.

[flintlock]

Re: Supporting Israel

I don't think it's easy sitting in the executive seat.

Especially if you're surrounded by professional bureaucrats not always acting selflessly in protecting/enhancing their own careers and domains.

While I think history has shown executive leadership has often gone against advice, how often is that advice in the best interest of the country? And how often is that advise lacking in personal risk/commitment and personal political calculation at the senior advisor level?

How often are those senior advisors rising from the trenches of civil service with global coalface experience?

How often are those senior advisors political appointees?

How often is the advice offered to executive leadership lacking special interest pollution?

Could not agree more. All the Monday morning QBs think it's so simple and clear cut. Things rarely are.