Author: Tim J. Clark

Information Mgmt in War

A Former Marine Discusses IT In Iraq
(Wall Street Journal)…Lee Gomes, July 1, 2008, Pg. B6

The U.S. military has been as enthusiastic about information technology as U.S. businesses have been, making computers, email and instant messaging part of everyday life for troops in Iraq. But the question of whether IT makes people better at what they do seems just as mixed a picture in combat as it is in the office.

The goal in war has always been to get as much intelligence to headquarters as quickly as possible, then to process it and get it back into the field. So, obviously, when you’re in the military and living in the Information Age, you want to take advantage of whatever technology is available. Radio is still the primary means of communication. With email, though, if anybody writes something, it’s a lot easier to read it later.

Army Study: Learn and adapt

Interview With Author Of New Army Study
(PBS)…Ray Suarez

…For more on what’s in the new Army study and its significance, we turn to Donald Wright, the lead author of the study; retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey had a 32-year career in the Army, he’s been to Iraq numerous times since the U.S. invasion; and retired Army Col. Douglas Macgregor writes frequently about military issues and is the author of “Transformation Under Fire: Revolutionizing How America Fights.”

Facts, Ideals, Leadership

OPINION: Liars’ Round-Up, On Security, Facts Matter,  New York Post, By Ralph Peters, June 28, 2008, Pg. 19

Whopper No. 1: America is less safe today than it was on Sept. 10, 2001.

Whopper No. 2: Al Qaeda is stronger than ever.

Whopper No. 3: Success in Iraq is an illusion – the surge failed.

Whopper No. 4: Iran is stronger than ever.

Whopper No. 5: The US-European relationship is a disaster.

Whopper No. 6: As president, Barack Obama would bring positive change to our foreign policy – and John McCain’s too old to get it.

 Whopper No. 7: Our troops are all coming home as psychos victimized by their participation in military atrocities.

Political systems usually result in sub-optimal outcomes, e.g.  somebody wins, somebody loses.  The long-term outcomes generally result in sustaining the status quo. 

Breaking the cycle to achieve more optimum outcomes requires agreement on  facts, ideals and common causes.  Interpretation of the facts that range from the conservative (see Whoppers above) to liberal, should be recognized and overcome. 

"Transformation" from the old paradigm to new requires Quality Leaders who can successfully manage and reduce variation.

Predicting Attacks, Complexity

Scientists Find ‘Law Of War’ That Predicts Attacks
(London Daily Telegraph)…Roger Highfield

…The European Consortium For Mathematics in Industry was told today that an international team has developed a physics-based theory describing the dynamics of insurgent group formation and attacks, which neatly explains the universal patterns observed in all modern wars and terrorism. The team is advising the United Nations, the Pentagon and Iraq.

The team told the meeting in University College London how it has taken advantage of the rise in amount of information available on conflicts, by filtering hundreds of online news sources and Government reports, and an emerging field, called complexity science.

"We use advanced computer simulations and mathematical models to create a plausible microscopic mechanism to explain the collective behaviour observed in a wide range of human conflict situations – from ongoing insurgent wars and terrorism, through to street-gangs and even online games," said Dr Gourley.

Added this post to a new "Top 10" category.   For context, see my weblog pages on leadership paradigm, complexity, prediction markets, and references to variation.

New Change: New Methods

Mullen: Flexibility Crucial As World Changes Quickly
(Mideast Stars and Stripes)…Charlie Coon, June 28, 2008

…Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael G. Mullen invoked "change" dozens of times Thursday while speaking at the new U.S. Africa Command, itself a harbinger of potential new military thinking.

Change how the government and military work together. Change how funding works so it moves more efficiently. Change how people are recruited into the military, retained and promoted.

Reinforces the need for government and non-government organizations to adopt a new approach in helping to resolve old problems.  See: Leadership Paradigm & Framework

Afghanistan: Trends ….

    U.S. Sounds Afghan Alarm, (Wall Street Journal)…Yochi Dreazen, In a remarkable shift, Afghanistan, where U.S. officials were once confident of victory, is now rivaling Iraq as the biggest cause of concern for American policymakers.
    Pentagon Report Anticipates Rising Violence In Afghanistan, (Washington Post)…Josh White
    …Attacks in Afghanistan have shown a dramatic upturn in recent weeks, appearing to validate the findings in the report, the first of its kind regarding the country.
    Pentagon Paints A Bleak Picture For Afghan South
    (Los Angeles Times)…Peter Spiegel and Julian E. Barnes
    …Any extension of the Marines’ tour is likely to be controversial. Navy Adm. Michael G. Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has said they will not stay more than seven months. And Gen. James T. Conway, commandant of the Marine Corps, has said any deployment past October would put unacceptable stress on his ground forces.
    New Deadly Attack Raises Coalition Toll
    (Atlanta Journal-Constitution)…Unattributed
    One member of the U.S.-led military coalition in Afghanistan was killed and five more wounded in the country’s increasingly turbulent west, the military said Friday.

N. Korea: First steps

Korean Nukes: Don’t Get Giddy, (New York Post)…Peter Brookes, June 27, 2008

NORTH Korea gave the world some good news this week – finally handing over a declaration about its nuclear program and promising to blow up the cooling tower at its Yongbyon nuclear facility. But don’t break out the best bubbly just yet.

These moves are only a first step in what is likely to be a drawn-out, slippery, pot-hole-filled road in a (possibly futile) attempt to roll back Kim Jong Il’s membership in the nuclear-weapons club.

But a welcome initial step. Pyongyang is six months late in handing over what’s supposed to be a complete and correct accounting of its nuclear programs – and you can bet we’re not going to get anything close to the Full Monty.

* It won’t have anything about the regime’s clandestine, uranium-based nuclear-weapons program.

* The declaration also won’t have any info on the regime’s nuclear-proliferation activities, such as its work with Damascus on a nuclear reactor at al Kibar in northern Syria (the one targeted in last September’s Israeli air raid).

* Finally, it won’t have the scoop on the size of the North Korean nuclear-weapons arsenal.

N.Korea: Incremental Strategy

Bush Rebuffs Hard-Liners To Ease North Korean Curbs
(New York Times)…Helene Cooper, June 27, 2008

…In the internal Bush administration war between the State Department and Mr. Cheney’s office over North Korea, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her top North Korea envoy, Christopher R. Hill, won a major battle against the Cheney camp when President Bush announced Thursday that he was taking the country he once described as part of the “axis of evil” off the State Department’s list of state sponsors of terrorism.

But the declaration falls short of the full accounting that the administration had sought, since it omits any information about North Korea’s suspected efforts to enrich uranium, or the extent of any of the North’s sharing of technology around the world.

Removing N. Korea from the terrorism blacklist is significant.