Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 31 of 31

Thread: Iraq: Pre-War Planning

  1. #21
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default I hadn't realized

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Humphrey View Post
    Numbers do mean a lot, and the problem really doesn't exist in trying to use them.
    that you were a radical Pythagorean, Ron !

    I would argue that,in and of themselves, numbers mean nothing; their only meaning (as with all languages) comes from that assigned by humans. All mathematics (aka "numbers") is an attempt to map out a perceived territory in "reality". Sometimes, the math works quite nicely in that it produced an accurate, manipulable and predictive model for 99.999% of the interactions in that slice of reality; most engineering is an example of this. Other times, quite honestly, it is the mathematical equivalent of "here there be dragons !" and is pretty much useless (aka a lot of social sciences).

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Humphrey View Post
    It really comes down to which numbers, who is using them ,and what they are using them for.
    Agreed with the addition of what are they based on, how do they collect them, and is what is the correspondence between the symbol and the (supposed) object. Let me just give a really simple example of this. Back in 2003 in Iraq, any shots taken at Coalition troops were counted as "terrorist / insurgent attacks". In reality, a significant number of them stemmed from people who had been shamed and the only way to recapture their honour was to "attack" the "foreign infidels" who had taken it away. The number that represented "terrorist / insurgent attacks" was artificially high (a poor correspondence with the actual terrain being mapped), while the secondary number of terrorist / insurgent accuracy" or effectiveness (kill ratio) was artificially low. This second number led to the creation of a false assumption, backed by "numbers", of the efficacy of any insurgency. Or, in other words, the map didn't adequately represent the terrain.
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  2. #22
    Council Member Ron Humphrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    1,099

    Cool Completely agree with both

    Quote Originally Posted by marct View Post
    that you were a radical Pythagorean, Ron !

    I would argue that,in and of themselves, numbers mean nothing; their only meaning (as with all languages) comes from that assigned by humans. All mathematics (aka "numbers") is an attempt to map out a perceived territory in "reality". Sometimes, the math works quite nicely in that it produced an accurate, manipulable and predictive model for 99.999% of the interactions in that slice of reality; most engineering is an example of this. Other times, quite honestly, it is the mathematical equivalent of "here there be dragons !" and is pretty much useless (aka a lot of social sciences).



    Agreed with the addition of what are they based on, how do they collect them, and is what is the correspondence between the symbol and the (supposed) object. Let me just give a really simple example of this. Back in 2003 in Iraq, any shots taken at Coalition troops were counted as "terrorist / insurgent attacks". In reality, a significant number of them stemmed from people who had been shamed and the only way to recapture their honour was to "attack" the "foreign infidels" who had taken it away. The number that represented "terrorist / insurgent attacks" was artificially high (a poor correspondence with the actual terrain being mapped), while the secondary number of terrorist / insurgent accuracy" or effectiveness (kill ratio) was artificially low. This second number led to the creation of a false assumption, backed by "numbers", of the efficacy of any insurgency. Or, in other words, the map didn't adequately represent the terrain.
    Thus the inclusion of the Caveats
    As to being Pythagorean



    In the larger sense I would hope not. I'm fairly certain the categories of existance should be limited to basically human or God(thus no third or IOW men like Pythagoras,

    The collaboration/sharing of information and equal parties aspects I could definately buy off on
    Any man can destroy that which is around him, The rare man is he who can find beauty even in the darkest hours

    Cogitationis poenam nemo patitur

  3. #23
    i pwnd ur ooda loop selil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Belly of the beast
    Posts
    2,112

    Default

    You had me right up until you said....

    Quote Originally Posted by Fuchs View Post
    The invasion would even have been a stupid idea IF Hussein had had chemical weapons. After all, he would have safely stored them without using the stuff for at least 12 years. The only sure way to make him use them would be an invasion...
    I think there are a few Kurds who would disagree. Heck the Iranians and Israelis would like agree to disagree with the basic assumption that chemical weapons in the hands of Saddam would be a good idea...
    Sam Liles
    Selil Blog
    Don't forget to duck Secret Squirrel
    The scholarship of teaching and learning results in equal hatred from latte leftists and cappuccino conservatives.
    All opinions are mine and may or may not reflect those of my employer depending on the chance it might affect funding, politics, or the setting of the sun. As such these are my opinions you can get your own.

  4. #24
    Council Member Hacksaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Lansing, KS
    Posts
    361

    Default

    Good catch Sam...

    Saddam had no links to terrorists... not - I seem to recall $$$ to families of martyrs.

    Saddam played the typical dictator game, brutal offense inside borders, strong defense outside borders... not - 1 million dead Iranians and the Kuwait come to mind.

    I saw the processed intel that built the arguement for CBRN disarmament, I wasn't wild about going back but felt it prudent. I was a little disallusioned when we found nothing but industrial chemicals and lots of plans

    Amazing how a place with as violent a history as Europe has turned.... reluctant



    Kilcullen is a genius!

    He came up with that one all on his own after only 5+ years? Attention everyone we have genius in our midst... Geez Life is some much clearer viewed through the rear view mirror.
    Last edited by Jedburgh; 07-29-2008 at 02:41 PM.
    Hacksaw
    Say hello to my 2 x 4

  5. #25
    Council Member Ron Humphrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    1,099

    Question Also after mulling this over

    Quote Originally Posted by marct View Post
    that you were a radical Pythagorean, Ron !

    I would argue that,in and of themselves, numbers mean nothing; their only meaning (as with all languages) comes from that assigned by humans. All mathematics (aka "numbers") is an attempt to map out a perceived territory in "reality". Sometimes, the math works quite nicely in that it produced an accurate, manipulable and predictive model for 99.999% of the interactions in that slice of reality; most engineering is an example of this. Other times, quite honestly, it is the mathematical equivalent of "here there be dragons !" and is pretty much useless (aka a lot of social sciences)..
    In this very context it might be seen as more clear why so many choose this format through which to attempt said mapping. Miscommunication, misinterpretation, etc are large parts of human interactions and consistently result in such chaotic ventures that it would seem unsurprising that so many choose to attempt to use an, at least less commonly misunderstood or mistranslated form of deliberation for how to "see" reality.

    Also along these lines I would postulate that even when the "numbers" don't necessarily equate to perfect knowledge they might at least help to point one in the right direction.

    Quote Originally Posted by marct View Post
    Agreed with the addition of what are they based on, how do they collect them, and is what is the correspondence between the symbol and the (supposed) object. Let me just give a really simple example of this. Back in 2003 in Iraq, any shots taken at Coalition troops were counted as "terrorist / insurgent attacks". In reality, a significant number of them stemmed from people who had been shamed and the only way to recapture their honour was to "attack" the "foreign infidels" who had taken it away. The number that represented "terrorist / insurgent attacks" was artificially high (a poor correspondence with the actual terrain being mapped), while the secondary number of terrorist / insurgent accuracy" or effectiveness (kill ratio) was artificially low. This second number led to the creation of a false assumption, backed by "numbers", of the efficacy of any insurgency. Or, in other words, the map didn't adequately represent the terrain.
    Another good one might be something as simple as the number of battles lost throughout history due to leaders allowing numbers to cause them to underestimate their enemies.
    Any man can destroy that which is around him, The rare man is he who can find beauty even in the darkest hours

    Cogitationis poenam nemo patitur

  6. #26
    Council Member Tom Odom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    DeRidder LA
    Posts
    3,949

    Default

    I think Dave K's response is on the mark as usual:
    My Views on Iraq
    Spencer Ackerman, in yesterday’s Washington Independent, claims I told him the Iraq war was “f*cking stupid”. He did not seek to clear that quote with me, and I would not have approved it if he had. If he HAD sought a formal comment, I would have told him what I have said publicly before: in my view, the decision to invade Iraq in 2003 was an extremely serious strategic error. But the task of the moment is not to cry over spilt milk, rather to help clean it up: a task in which the surge, the comprehensive counterinsurgency approach, and our troops on the ground are admirably succeeding.

    Anyone who knows me has been well aware of my position on Iraq for years. When I went to Iraq in 2007 (and on both previous occasions) it was to end the war, by suppressing the violence and defeating the insurgency. (Note: I said END the war, not abandon it half-way through, leaving the Iraqis to be slaughtered. When we invaded Iraq, we took on a moral and legal responsibility for its people’s wellbeing. Regardless of anyone’s position on the decision to invade, those obligations still stand and cannot be wished away merely because they have proven inconvenient).

  7. #27
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Proving, perhaps, that half of

    Quote Originally Posted by Fuchs View Post
    William, you should know that about half of European's population said the same even before it happened...
    Europe didn't understand the real reasons for that invasion...
    The invasion would even have been a stupid idea IF Hussein had had chemical weapons. After all, he would have safely stored them without using the stuff for at least 12 years. The only sure way to make him use them would be an invasion...
    Immaterial in reality -- but an admittedly bad choice for the stated rationale. It served only to really muddy the water...

  8. #28
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default Legal responsibility ?

    from Kilcullen, My Views on Iraq, cited above
    ......
    When we invaded Iraq, we took on a moral and legal responsibility for its people’s wellbeing.
    I'd be interested in the legal argument for the proposition (of legal responsibility), expressed in standard format.

    1. Facts relevant to the question.

    2. Legal precedents which are applicable.

    3. Conclusion, including the time period claimed for which an invading power (as opposed to a longer-term occupying power or SOFA power) is responsible for "wellbeing".

    I do not have such a brief lurking in the background; but have thought about it. In short, I am open to be educated.

  9. #29
    i pwnd ur ooda loop selil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Belly of the beast
    Posts
    2,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    I'd be interested in the legal argument for the proposition (of legal responsibility), expressed in standard format.

    1. Facts relevant to the question.

    2. Legal precedents which are applicable.

    3. Conclusion, including the time period claimed for which an invading power (as opposed to a longer-term occupying power or SOFA power) is responsible for "wellbeing".

    I do not have such a brief lurking in the background; but have thought about it. In short, I am open to be educated.
    I don't know the whole story but maybe LawVol or one of his buddies can weigh in. I know that "Law of war" has been a big issue and all that means.
    Sam Liles
    Selil Blog
    Don't forget to duck Secret Squirrel
    The scholarship of teaching and learning results in equal hatred from latte leftists and cappuccino conservatives.
    All opinions are mine and may or may not reflect those of my employer depending on the chance it might affect funding, politics, or the setting of the sun. As such these are my opinions you can get your own.

  10. #30
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default Backgrounder

    My post just above relates to my post of longer back re: "invade and leave"

    I remember a CNN interview with John Bolton (coundn't run it down in their archives), where he suggested he did not want to stay in Iraq .."because Republicans are no better at nation building than Democrats."

    He did say much the same in the BBC interview

    3/25[/2007]
    BBC Newsnight's Jeremy Paxman
    .....
    Iraq 4 Years On: A Neo-con Rethink?
    ....
    Q. Is there not an American responsibility, having invaded a country, dismantled all the apparatus of government, to ensure the citizens of that country are not murdered?

    A. I think it's the responsibility which we've tried to fulfill to turn it back over to the Iraqis... We made a mistake in hindsight not turning it over to them earlier.
    ....
    But we don't have a responsibility to make the government of Iraq succeed, that's their responsibility.

    Q. Do you have a responsibility to keep the peace or not?

    A. I think that's their responsibility too. I think we're all agreed the sooner the Iraqis can decide whether they're gonna do that or not the the better off everyone is.

    Q. You sound as if you're washing your hands of the whole affair?
    ...
    A. What I would have done differently is much earlier, much sooner after the overthrow, given it back to the Iraqis, and I'll exaggerate for effect here, but given them a copy of the Federalist Papers and said good luck.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuqNWG9sbuE&embed=1

  11. #31
    Council Member Tom Odom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    DeRidder LA
    Posts
    3,949

    Default PR Push for Iraq War Preceded Intelligence Findings

    New material released on the push for war:


    PR Push for Iraq War Preceded Intelligence Findings

    "White Paper" Drafted before NIE even Requested

    National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 254

    Posted - August 22, 2008

    For more information contact:
    John Prados - (202) 994-7000

    Washington D.C., August 22, 2008 - The U.S. intelligence community buckled sooner in 2002 than previously reported to Bush administration pressure for data justifying an invasion of Iraq, according to a documents posting on the Web today by National Security Archive senior fellow John Prados.

    The documents suggest that the public relations push for war came before the intelligence analysis, which then conformed to public positions taken by Pentagon and White House officials. For example, a July 2002 draft of the "White Paper" ultimately issued by the CIA in October 2002 actually pre-dated the National Intelligence Estimate that the paper purportedly summarized, but which Congress did not insist on until September 2002.

    A similar comparison between a declassified draft and the final version of the British government's "White Paper" on Iraq weapons of mass destruction adds to evidence that the two nations colluded in the effort to build public support for the invasion of Iraq. Dr. Prados concludes that the new evidence tends to support charges raised by former White House press secretary Scott McClellan and by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in its long-delayed June 2008 "Phase II" report on politicization of intelligence.
    Last edited by Tom Odom; 08-22-2008 at 04:28 PM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •