Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 121

Thread: SFA as part of a campaign design: supporting operational requirements (part 1)

  1. #81
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Here we go.

    http://publications.campaignroom.com...s%20wCover.pdf

    PDF pages 38 and 39 under Guiding Precepts and Rules of Engagement.
    Last edited by slapout9; 05-26-2009 at 11:47 PM. Reason: add stuff

  2. #82
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default Here we go, "into the wide blue yonder ...."

    BUT then: "Up and away, junior birdmen ...." And a brawl ensues.[*]

    Well, no brawl here. I did read about Guiding Precepts and Rules of Engagement, which are introduced as follows:

    Guiding Precepts

    Concept Overview

    Left to own devices, people will behave in remarkably different ways and what seems bizarre behavior to one person may appear quite normal and proper to another. If an organization wants to channel behavior in a certain way, it needs to be explicit about what behavior it wants. In other words, it needs to have Guiding Precepts. Guiding Precepts tell the people in an organization what they should and should not do and the reasons behind either. To get the highest level of acceptance and adherence, Guiding Precepts should be developed (or discussed extensively after the fact) in an Open Planning environment. For simplicity, you divide Guiding Precepts into two categories: Prime Directives and Rules of Engagement. The former are the very high level behaviors that an organization sees to be at its very core. Members will do whatever it takes to follow positive Prime Directives and face extreme censure if they violate those that are negative. Prime Directives help move people in the right direction and help keep them from moving in the wrong direction. They apply generally and are independent of time and place.

    Rules of Engagement are similar to Prime Directives but are somewhat more flexible and may only apply to certain circumstances. They may also change over time as circumstances change as opposed to a Prime Directive which should not change unless the organization consciously decides to make major changes in its strategy to include its culture.

    If Guiding Precepts are to be effective, everyone in an organization must know them and they must be enforced—either positively with rewards for positive precepts or with punishment of negative precepts.
    I also searched through the document to see if either Prime Directives or ROEs were either developed by use of Warden rings, or whether they were incorporated into the Warden rings illustrations. I could find none.

    What this article seems to say (to me) is something like this:

    Highest Level: Guiding Precepts (incl. Prime Directives & Rules of Engagement)

    Lower Level: Warden rings (and other targeting models, for that matter) - are part of the Operational Requirements (in my jargon used above) - which will be accepted only if they are consistent with the higher Guiding Precepts.

    That's the way I read it. Now that I have both the 1997 and 2007 articles on this HD, I'll read them with more thought.

    A thought on models. Before entering the legal racket, I did have a valid trade (in chemistry, where models are used for everything). BUT, chemists realize that models are at best approximations - and subject to constant updating (and perhaps discarding) because of new lessons learned. AND, that, models are very much subject to the GIGO rule.

    -----------------------------
    Rob has (for me) an interesting post here (#65).

    Georgie III actually did some "SFA" in the RW, using the still-existing structure of the CFM-Canada in the Great Lakes. By then, those remaining Canadian Marines (and their engagés) were the backbone of the fur trade. Similar activities took place among the Six Nations, both north and south of the St. Lawrence.

    Might be worth a write-up; but this stuff is all over my genealogical-historical-SWC harddrive. If I do (which is no promise or threat), I'd do it as an attached file. Already have a lead character in mind - 1st cousin (as I calculate them) to the gal who married my ancestor Nick the Grenadier. Some historical "comparative SOF" might be fun.

    ------------------------
    [*] Not a war story from my dad, but from some WWII flick (Audie Murphy ?).

    After he got out of the Paris and London hospitals, he was TDY'd to an 8AF-RAF base at Cardiff, Wales (where he stayed into 1946). So, he wore an 8AF patch on the left and a 30ID patch on the right ("combined arms" ). Had the greatest respect for the AAC and RAF guys who flew the bloody (literally) bombers.

    BTW: Wilf, if you happen to read this, I DL'd Oliver's article and, so, read it more carefully. Dads.

  3. #83
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    jmm99, The rings are just one part of the entire strategy development process. Guiding precepts and ROE are a separate step under Design the future. You should have those before you get to Targeting because they will guide what you pick as targets and what and how you will try to affect them. Strike don't strike target lists, lethal vs. non lethal attacks.


    The 5 rings model. According to the theory all systems have 5 rings.

    1-Leadership
    2-System Essentials (processes)
    3-Infrastructure
    4-Populations
    5-Fielded Forces(action units)

    The stuff(targets)that goes into each ring are supposed to be put in by you or whoever is doing the analysis and they will be different on each system being analyzed. There are no predetermined targets to go under each ring
    unless you are dealing with identical systems. Example if I choose to target Corn's model (which I thought you were asking me about) I would put operational requirements under the Process ring. The Law and ROE would go under Infrastructure because it is a constant,dosen't change much so it provides a conceptual infrastructure as opposed to a physical one. Highways are physical infrastructure, rules of the road are conceptual infrastructure.

    Further once Corn's targets were on the initial map I would do a fractal analysis with another 5 rings model until I got to a level where I could develop an action plan to affect the target in order to achieve my desired effect.

    Make any since now?
    Last edited by slapout9; 05-27-2009 at 04:06 AM. Reason: fix stuff

  4. #84
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default Ah so, my Corn model is what's under attack ...

    from Slap
    Example if I choose to target Corn's model (which I thought you were asking me about) .....
    and I didn't even know it - stealth technology. OK, that makes the situation clearer. We are at war.

    Waging "war" on conceptuals (e.g., US Law, UK Law or Sharia Law, for that matter) is an interesting topic - about which, I'd expect all kinds of different views. Not sure where that fits into Rob's SFA stuff, though.

    I do get the 2007 article you cited. I was viewing both concepts (Warden and Corn) from the viewpoint of the attacker - not the attackee.

  5. #85
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi JMM,

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    Waging "war" on conceptuals (e.g., US Law, UK Law or Sharia Law, for that matter) is an interesting topic - about which, I'd expect all kinds of different views. Not sure where that fits into Rob's SFA stuff, though.
    I think it gets right to the heart of the concept(s?) of "legitimacy" which is a major part of the SFA conceptual base. Just as one example, think about the concept of "Rule of Law" - Which law? Which legal system? Which fundamental postulates? "Law", as it is used in a lot of places, is held out as an absolute when it isn't one which, IMO, creates all sorts of problems in all sorts of areas.

    One which pops to mind, and this is just jotting down the brain-fart before I rush off to sing a concert, is in how institutions of governmentality are viewed. For example, pre-~2004 FATA was "governed" by relying on tribal institutions of governance backed up by a threat of punitive expeditions. These institutions, however, were not recognized as "existing" by many Western governments which pushed the Pakistani Army into trying to extend governmentality to the region. Needless to say, the effort failed pretty miserably and, as part of the failure, the potentiality of the threat to mount punitive raids by the Pakistani Army has lost its relevance since they've been beaten several times.
    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/

  6. #86
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    and I didn't even know it - stealth technology. OK, that makes the situation clearer. We are at war.

    jmm99, No, and this is important..... Corn has been mapped and targeted...I could then figure out my Strategy to support the Corn model as well as destabilize it.

  7. #87
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default Law & War

    from Marc
    "Law", as it is used in a lot of places, is held out as an absolute when it isn't one ......
    No argument with that. What is interesting, I think, is how law permeates a society without the society thinking about it. Morning coffee and roll ordered, served and paid for - contract made and performed. Next stop at gas station; gas pumped and sandwich picked up for lunch; both paid for - contract made and performed. And so on through the day.

    That is why "legitimacy" is such a tough topic - wiping away 100s of years of development (much of it informal) by substituting new formal rules looks like a very hard uphill slog to me.

    Hey JMM, write a new constitution for Whatwackistan. Yeh, right.

    --------------
    OK, Slap, now that you've attacked me, show me how you'd defend me. Seriously.

  8. #88
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post

    --------------
    OK, Slap, now that you've attacked me, show me how you'd defend me. Seriously.
    Since I have colored all over Rob Thornton's thread and he probably want send me anymore good stuff because of that,maybe you should start a new thread and I will see what I can do. Sorry Rob

  9. #89
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi JMM,

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    No argument with that. What is interesting, I think, is how law permeates a society without the society thinking about it. Morning coffee and roll ordered, served and paid for - contract made and performed. Next stop at gas station; gas pumped and sandwich picked up for lunch; both paid for - contract made and performed. And so on through the day.
    Yup - it really is amazing. For me, one of the most fascinating things is the "slipperiness" of how "law" moves between custom and formalization, especially since the formalization is, in most cases, controlled by a very small group of people. It's interesting that you used contract examples, whereas I would use reciprocity examples; different relationships, but the same social function.

    Back when I was doing the fieldwork for my doctorate (on the Career Transition industry), one of the things I noticed was the growing split between the formal / legal systems for getting a job and the informal, soon-to-be customary systems. A couple of days ago, I was chatting with the person running a bridging program for foreign trained engineers here in Ottawa, and she was telling me about one of her students who was having a reality shock: he had been offered a job and was only asked for his resume as an after though for the "HR dweebs".

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    That is why "legitimacy" is such a tough topic - wiping away 100s of years of development (much of it informal) by substituting new formal rules looks like a very hard uphill slog to me.

    Hey JMM, write a new constitution for Whatwackistan. Yeh, right.
    Hah! Not a problem, mon! Start with the Hittite legal code and go from there ....
    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/

  10. #90
    Council Member Rob Thornton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Fort Leavenworth, KS
    Posts
    1,510

    Default

    Marc, JMM - just wanted to chime in and say I like the discussion on law. Wrt institutional development in places where there may be multiple legal codes, where one may be formal and another informal, and where one may hold more influence than another it has some significant implications.

    Best, Rob

  11. #91
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default HO-K, Tyrrell...

    after reading certain articles, I can see why you are interested in the Code of the Nesilim.

    The Hittite "recruiting station" is outlined here (actually makes some sense in a feudal land holding system, based on military tenure[*]):

    40. If a soldier disappear, and a vassal arise and the vassal say, "This is my military holding, but this other one is my tenancy," and lay hands upon the fields of the soldier, he may both hold the military holding and perform the tenancy duties. If he refuse the military service, then he forfeits the vacant fields of the soldier. The men of the village shall cultivate them. If the king give a captive, they shall give the fields to him, and he becomes a soldier.
    I'll let you write the constitution for Whatwackistan from the Hittite Code.

    -----------------------------
    [*]
    Does anything like this exist today in Iraq or Astan ? Fight for the tribe & you get land (or whatever). That would seem a hard system to break. In a way, the Viet Minh did this via their land reform program (from 1946 on). For various reasons, the RVN did not fight fire with fire. The bulk of ARVN was peasant, who if they survived had little to look forward to. This actually is a SFA issue - non ?

  12. #92
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    after reading certain articles, I can see why you are interested in the Code of the Nesilim.
    It does seem wonky on the face of it, but it makes a lot of sense. The Code itself was aimed at cracking the power of the Hittite lineage factions in the Old Kingdom as part of an effort to centralize governmental institutions.

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    I'll let you write the constitution for Whatwackistan from the Hittite Code.
    Works for me, as long as YOU take on the task of "selling it" to the international community and USG !

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    Does anything like this exist today in Iraq or Astan ? Fight for the tribe & you get land (or whatever).
    From my understanding, not as a direct, formal system - fighting for the lineage group (family, tribe, clan, whatever segment [and it varies significantly between Iraq and Astan]) is an expectation - a matter of customary "law", as is being able to access resources (including land) that are help by the lineage group. What the Hittite Code tried to do was to formalize it and abrogate the source of formal legitimation to the Crown and away from the lineage.... There are some similar proviso's in the 8th-9th century ce German codes as well.
    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/

  13. #93
    Council Member Rob Thornton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Fort Leavenworth, KS
    Posts
    1,510

    Default

    I know from the interviews we've done (such as the Reid Pixler interview in the Mosul Case study) that military and civilian lawyers are playing a role in reconstructing legal systems, and in supporting local processes, but as I read JMM and Marc's discussion, I'm thinking of the requirement differently wrt development.

    This does not just get into design, but back into the threads on SFA as an individually based capability and into the Plan, Train and Organize (particularly the Organize piece).

    I know Marc's interests and areas of specialty from conversing over multiple beers - his interests are diverse for sure JMM has expressed a range of relevant knowledge on law - but what I really find intriguing is the ability to apply it to multiple area. I did not expect the Code of the Nesilim to show up, in fact I did not know there was such a thing, but it is precisely the kind of conversation and knowledge I think you want coming out of the design process.

    The link back to the other threads is that the ability to get the most out of design has a great deal to do with the caliber and knowledge of the people involved, the breadth of their combined knowledge and the ability and strength of the leadership to fully employ it. I'm not saying every design team needs to be fully staffed with all Marcs and JMMs - it might be resource prohibitive, however having one or two on the team would seem a worthy investment. What might be a balance between effectiveness and efficiency would be able to assemble talent outside of the immediate organization to form design teams relevant to the conditions and objectives.

    I might also add we still have trouble remembering the swivels work on our office chairs, and that we still have issues with parochialism - e.g. the not invented here, and/or outside threat effects. When we start to think that somehow a problem or a solution is only the purview of a staff section or small part of the organization we begin to suffer from self-constrained thinking. It would seem we could adopt a best practice from the SWJ SWC.

    Best, Rob

  14. #94
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Link to newest issue of JFQ with article by Charles Dunlap on how Lawfare can be a decisive element in future wars. Rob, me, you and Lawvol had a similar discussion a while back about this very subject or something similar.

    http://www.ndu.edu/inss/Press/jfq_pa...ons/i54/12.pdf

  15. #95
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default See also ...

    this post to MG Dunlap's 2001 article (which is more technical) and also to some other links to "Lawfare" articles. Also COL Newell's thesis, which I summed in this post, seems relevant.

    ------------------
    The Hittites weren't that wonky - they had a realistic view of the facts of life:

    191. If a free man picks up now this woman, now that one, now in this country, then in that country, there shall be no punishment if they came together sexually willingly.
    Seriously, most of the Hittite Code involves the "Code of Personal Life", which is in place everywhere in one form or another (formal, informal or mixed). It's important to know the cousinage rules in the ME - I have for clients an Assyrian family. If the size of their present-day males is any indication of the size of the ancient Assyrians, I can see why they were feared soldiers.

    ---------------------
    Personally, I think it is very important for there to be officers such as COL Newell, who are willing to dive into legal, moral & ethical issues themselves - and not leave it up to such as Marc and JMM (who might spend too much time drinking beer and talking about the Windmill ). COL Newell noted that he spent a lot of time with a JAG officer discussing and arguing many of the points made in his thesis.

    For such conversations to be meaningful, both participants have to have a knowledge of each other's specialities - a point also made by MG Dunlap ...

    in 2001:

    This essay critiques aspects of LOAC as currently practiced, but it is not meant to denigrate its fundamental importance. Americans would not be Americans if they waged war unconstrained by the ethical values LOAC represents. Rather, this paper is intended as a reminder that those interested in promoting law as an ameliorator of the misery of war are obliged to ensure it does not become bogged down with interpretations that are at odds with legitimate military concerns. LOAC must remain receptive to new developments, especially technological ones that can save lives – even if that means breaking old paradigms.

    We also must have a better linkage between those knowledgeable of military affairs and those civilian specialists expert in LOAC. Only productive cooperation can achieve the critical mass necessary to sustain international law as a guiding element in military interventions. We should encourage other nations to develop a robust cadre of uniformed lawyers ready to provide insightful advice to commanders in the field. Finally, we must not allow thoughtless, ill-informed, and politically motivated accusations to trivialize LOAC’s fundamental principles. If it does, LOAC will lose its credibility with the very people – and the very nation - it most needs to make certain it is observed and, more importantly, preserved.
    and in 2009:

    Lawfare has become such an indelible feature of 21st-century conflicts that commanders dismiss it at their peril. Key leaders recognize this evolution. General James Jones, USMC (Ret.), the Nation’s new National Security Advisor, observed several years ago that the nature of war has changed. “It’s become very legalistic and very complex, ”he said, adding that now “you have to have a lawyer or a dozen.” Lawfare, of course, is about more than lawyers; it is about the rule of law and its relation to war.
    and about regular soldiers who are willing and able to see law as a tool of their profession.

  16. #96
    Council Member Bob's World's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,706

    Default or consider...

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    and about regular soldiers who are willing and able to see law as a tool of their profession.

    That it may be law that makes soldiers a usable tool...

    Violence unconstrained by law (formal or informal, many "failed states" are functioning quite well within tribal law at a level our white eyes can't seem to appreciate) is chaos. Just violence (or the certain threat of it) constrained by law brings order.
    Last edited by Ken White; 05-29-2009 at 12:18 AM. Reason: Fix quote
    Robert C. Jones
    Intellectus Supra Scientia
    (Understanding is more important than Knowledge)

    "The modern COIN mindset is when one arrogantly goes to some foreign land and attempts to make those who live there a lesser version of one's self. The FID mindset is when one humbly goes to some foreign land and seeks first to understand, and then to help in some small way for those who live there to be the best version of their own self." Colonel Robert C. Jones, US Army Special Forces (Retired)

  17. #97
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default Good question ...

    from BW
    That it may be law that makes soldiers a usable tool...
    and my answer is that I hope not - my problem is with the word "makes".

    Are you suggesting that law imposed on soldiers makes soldiers usable tools. My perception is that kind of externally-imposed constraint will fall away under stress - although I suppose if it is drilled in enough, it might well hold up under lots of stress (just as our ancestors stood line to line at 30 yards & fired musket volleys). I don't have a dogmatic stance.[*]

    My statement:

    ...and about regular soldiers who are willing and able to see law as a tool of their profession.
    was made in the context of MG Dunlap's articles concerning "Lawfare" - use of law as a tool in operations.

    -----------------------------
    [*] Your question (on violence and law) goes more to ethics & morality in war - reflected in part in the formal laws of war. And to a pool league nite discussion (a Todd-JMM discussion cuz of a Vietnam book he was reading), where the question was: what do you, as a newbie unit commander, do (if anything) about your unit (a boondocks unit) which takes ears to keep count. Discussion terminated without a brilliant doctrinal rule because we had to get up and play our 3 games.

  18. #98
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi Guys,

    Just back from chairing a session at the Canadian Political Science meetings - interesting one dealing with COIN and radicalization, and with some direct relevance to this thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rob Thornton View Post
    I know from the interviews we've done (such as the Reid Pixler interview in the Mosul Case study) that military and civilian lawyers are playing a role in reconstructing legal systems, and in supporting local processes, but as I read JMM and Marc's discussion, I'm thinking of the requirement differently wrt development.

    This does not just get into design, but back into the threads on SFA as an individually based capability and into the Plan, Train and Organize (particularly the Organize piece).
    Agreed, Rob. I'm beginning to think we need a separate thread on the ontology of SFA (I know, John, you're running away ). It strikes me, and this was really hammered home as I listened to a great paper by Colleen Bell today, that we have to do some serious thinking about the implications of our terminology. Okay, I was predisposed this way already, but I really do think it is crucial.

    Back to the Marc - JMM discussion part, the key linguistic term there is really "rule of law". As we pulled out, the crucial questions are "Whose law?" and "What form(s) does it take?" which, in a round about manner, get's us back to Robs point about endstates as the starting point for design. We want to achieve an endstate with qualities X, Y and Z, then we design the SFA mission to achieve them. The critical danger, and actually where I see sierra disturbers like me playing a key role, is asking those questions.

    Let me take an extremely pragmatic argument line on this (I don't necessarily believe it, but it is a decent rhetorical device). If the endstate in nation X that is desired is that it will not be a safe-haven for terrorist attacks on Western targets, the the crucial goal must be some form of agreement whereby if attacks are made, then the reprisal for those attacks will be more costly for the attackers that those commiting the reprisal.

    This goal is defined by several factors. First, the absolute reality that there can never be a 100% "Terrorist Free" zone. Or, to be somewhat snarky and use a favorite meme, "the only things in life that are 100% are death and taxes". Second, given that a 100% terrorist free zone is impossible, what deterents are available that have the highest probability of operating? It strikes me that the best form of "community policing" (for want of a better term) is policing carried out by the community itself rather than by an externally imposed force.

    Third, and this flows from the previous two points, if this is so, then the source of legitimacy within such forms of community policing must flow from the community themselves. Or, in other words, "how do we get them to stop wanting to kill us".

    The corroloary, and this is where we get into things like the Hittite code, is that constructing a desire to not attack us and, indeed, to beat the snot out of people who want to attack us, relies on culturally specific logics. Let me give an example of this.

    In Kilcullen's recent book, he talks a lot about "accidental guerillas" - people who are attacking co-alition forces who are locals, but who have not bought in to the Takfiri [psychotic] world view. Within his broader discussion, he deals with a number of different mechanisms which varying cultures have developed to stop conflicts - Shura's being one. These are systems of "customary law", i.e. they will bring community self-policing functions into play if their results are not accepted.

    Now in Afghanistan and, to a lessor degree Iraq and other places (Somalia, Kenya, the Sudan, etc.), these customary law sites (actually rituals) have been degraded by years of conflict: the concepts may still be there, but they are assuming an almost "Golden Age" quality (much along the same lines as AQ's Caliphate....). We should be able to take the "best" of the old customary law systems and "tweak" them, putting some teeth back in them, but part of this "tweaking" would involve tying them in to some form of centralized source of legitimacy (which is what the Hittite Code was trying to do).

    What, I can hear people asking, does this have to do with SFA? Well, part of it is that people engaged in SFA require not only those personal "qualities" - that individual capability that Rob talks about - but, also, require enough mental (and, dare I say it, "spiritual") flexibility to say "Hey, wouldn't work for me, but if it works for you, go for it...". Being blunt about it, it requires the ability to cut through not only the other cultures BS, but you own cultures BS. For me, this requirement was hammered home in the interview with COL Brackney in the Mosul Case Study:
    There were some formal assessment tools that had come down through both the embassy office and the division that they would… I’m trying to think what the name was of the actual assessment tool, and I’ve got that image but it escapes me right now, but anyway, it was a very long form with all kinds of bubble charts about is it red, green, or yellow in different areas from how many educators were online, how many kids were in school to the quality of the services, was there X amount of electricity, and sewage treatments; and was the governor in place for more than six months, and did he have an actual council? There were all kinds of metrics that way, but there was kind of the underlying metric we had, which was how we were doing in a few key areas. Number one is, “are we seeing an impact, and are we seeing some democratic processes actually taking place within the provincial council and government?” [emphasis added]
    It is the ability to "cut to the chase" and whipe away the BS. What is crucial, i.e. the minimally acceptable requirements?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rob Thornton View Post
    I know Marc's interests and areas of specialty from conversing over multiple beers - his interests are diverse for sure
    LOLOL - Oh, that's definitely true, Rob .

    Quote Originally Posted by Rob Thornton View Post
    JMM has expressed a range of relevant knowledge on law - but what I really find intriguing is the ability to apply it to multiple area. I did not expect the Code of the Nesilim to show up, in fact I did not know there was such a thing, but it is precisely the kind of conversation and knowledge I think you want coming out of the design process.
    Absolutely agree, there.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rob Thornton View Post
    The link back to the other threads is that the ability to get the most out of design has a great deal to do with the caliber and knowledge of the people involved, the breadth of their combined knowledge and the ability and strength of the leadership to fully employ it. I'm not saying every design team needs to be fully staffed with all Marcs and JMMs - it might be resource prohibitive, however having one or two on the team would seem a worthy investment. What might be a balance between effectiveness and efficiency would be able to assemble talent outside of the immediate organization to form design teams relevant to the conditions and objectives.
    Okay, I'll admit to being biased, but I think that is a good idea. Building a design team of Marc's and JMM's would, in all honesty, be a freaking disaster ! A really good design team, and it doesn't matter what the "product" is, is, in many ways, like controling a nuclear reaction (hat tip to Christopher Anvil for the anaology) - JMM and I are like fissionable material in the realm of ideas, without "dampening rods", all you will get is an explosion .

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    ------------------
    The Hittites weren't that wonky - they had a realistic view of the facts of life:

    Seriously, most of the Hittite Code involves the "Code of Personal Life", which is in place everywhere in one form or another (formal, informal or mixed).
    Yup, and it's another good reason to go back to the early codes and, in some ways, the earlier the better. BTW, I never said that the Hittites were wonky, just that the idea of bringing them (and their legal code) into a discussion of modern SFA might be seen as wonky.
    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/

  19. #99
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default Doubtful ...

    from marc
    JMM and I are like fissionable material in the realm of ideas, without "dampening rods", all you will get is an explosion ...
    but understandable, since all you can know is what you see here.

    If we were working on a project in "real time and space" involving me, you would find that explosions would not occur within the project.

    -----------------------
    I'd amend this, with respect to white space and gray space regions (where lack of governance allows violent non-state actors to roam)...

    ...."how do we get them to stop wanting to kill us".
    to something like this ...

    ..."how do we get them (anti-violence types) to control or prevent them (VNSAs) from trying to kill us."
    While I will accept any and all real conversions from VNSAs (from "wanting to kill us" to "not wanting to kill us"), my perception is that's very utopian.

    What I perceive not to be as utopian would be working toward governance in white space and gray space areas, which (1) avoids folks becoming "accidental guerrillas" (still waiting for that book); and (2) allows formation of a governing structure (indigenous) which is willing to control or prevent VNSAs from operating transnationally from the region. I'd expect there would be lots of quid pro quos in such an arrangement - as well as the need for real reciprocity.

    ----------------------------
    I do have some questions about the scope of SFA, but my "stuff" on that is at home. Maybe later.

    PS: What is ontology ? The study of Ontos ? They were neat.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  20. #100
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Guess I will have to get my crayons back out. Ring2 Processes. The Process of creating the Law is going to be far more important than the final legal code you come up with. Ring1 leadership....who will be the great Lawgiver is the most important as Marct pointed out.

Similar Threads

  1. What is JCISFA, what is SFA, and how does it fit in the greater scheme of things-PT 1
    By Rob Thornton in forum FID & Working With Indigenous Forces
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 03-05-2010, 03:48 PM
  2. SFA capability is rooted in Individual Talent (part 1)
    By Rob Thornton in forum Training & Education
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 05-21-2009, 09:30 PM
  3. Operational Design Process and Security Force Assistance
    By SWJED in forum FID & Working With Indigenous Forces
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-10-2008, 09:03 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
  •