nerdgirl

That’s a good general suggestion – and not just alumni. Many student groups on college campuses seek volunteer experiences. When I did my undergrad in south central Los Angeles I started a club to get together with other nerdy chicks who liked science and math. One of the things we did was volunteer at the LA Girl Scouts Science Center, which was located at the time just south of downtown LA in a predominantly Hispanic area ... and really was more a safe place for girls to go after school. We put together programs to make slime (polymers) and brought liquid nitrogen - bunch of 'gee-whiz'-type science projects young kids could do. After doing that for a couple years, I came to the conclusion that what was most important wasn’t sparking interest in science but being role models of young women who were attending college. And frankly, we got a lot out of it too! Thanks for inspiring a fun memory on an overcast morning in Atlanta.

96% of the Afghan population, as of January 2009, wants someone other than the Taliban running the country. Altho’ I don’t know off the top of my head a good source for percentage of Colonial Americans who wanted to remain British subjects, I’m betting it was larger than 4%. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Asking the same question I posed to [FallingOsh]: Why? What's the thinking behind it? I wonder historically what have been changes in rates of English assimilation? E.g., do you remember this NPR story from April? "In Rural Wisconsin, German Reigned For Decades" /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

We've discussed the shift from the shift from predominantly separatist-nationalist character of terrorist groups in the (anti-Colonial) era of the 1950s - 1970s to religiously-motivated ones over the last 30 years of so before. Ya'alon, you, and I get that ... suspect (perhaps wrongly?) that a lot of folks don't, as well as the implications of that shift for strategic responses. Recent book that I found interesting on it: Reza Aslan's How to Win a Comsic War. Would you expand on where/how you see "family roots of the current [Jihadist ?] ideology" in Marx? I can go back to Ibn-Taymiyyah (1200s CE), Ibn-Ad-al-Wahab (1700s), Rashid Rida (early 1900s), and Abu-al-A'la-Mawdudi (1940s) without even getting to Qutb/Muslim Brotherhood ... but I'm genuinely not seeing the Marx connection. Look forward to learning something new or at least a new way to think about something. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

He's a little ahead of the political agenda. Right now, we're supposed to be promoting Afghanistan as the aggressor in the middle-east, harboring and cultivating terrorists. Of course, 10 years ago, it was Iraq, 'building weapons of mass-destruction'. Things there are looking very Western, right now, but there's still work to do. But before we go into Iran, we have to finish our nation-building in Afghanistan. Eventually, Israel will get what they want: complete take-over of the middle-east. But, they need to vilify one heathen country at a time. And yes, all the above is said in complete mockery and utter disdain. Whether in mockery or not, 10 years from now base of radical Salafists: Yemen, Islamic Maghreb (mostly Algeria), Mali, or where? /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

From my perspective, I’m worried that pursuing a counterinsurgency strategy will be ‘blamed’ militarily & politically. I still think that Afghanistan is a much tougher problem than most are willing to acknowledge and that the path to solution is not solely through more gun(ners). They're very, very important, imo ... but not the whole solution. In the end for me, much like I’ve written previously w/r/t the Bush administration ‘taking credit’ for Libya’s decision to rollback its offensive chemical and nuclear weapons programs, I don’t care who takes credit *if* the end results are in America’s strategic interests. (And yes, I get to define what those are in this context. ) Unlike Libya, which generated immediate removal and reduction of a chemical weapons stockpile and abandonment of nuclear weapons pursuit, the implications of decisions in Afghanistan are likely to take 10 or 20 or 30 years to be realized. Shipping out of Tripoli tons of sulfur mustard was immediate (e.g., “now-ism”) and something that could be shown to Congress as evidence of progress/success. It’s hard to measure, or in today's OSD-parlance ‘put a metric on’, success in a counterinsurgency. Schools built? (What if they’re being occupied by Taliban-affiliated Haqqanis? Sadly true in at least one case of which I am familiar.) Roads paved? I’m still thinking # of lawyers per capita is a genuine potential measure. It signals stable institutions, civil law, and rule of law. In addition to the Iranian revolution, something else that happened in 1979, as I’m confident you know, was the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. How that destabilized what was a limited but modern-leaning Islamic state (Kabul was the “Paris of the East” in the 1960s & 1970s, and women wore miniskirts) enabled the rise of the Taliban, which made it a safe-haven for al Qa’eda, was only recognized by a few until 22 years later. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

That comment caught my attention. Why? What's the thinking behind it? And it's fine by me if it's speculative.

This quote was an answer from a citizen put on the air. How soon we forget yes indeed. Concur. I looked at the link in your original post – genuinely interesting cross-cut of responses, "Tito from Hollywood" particularly, imo. Would you point me to some specific statements made by Pres Obama that you see as "blaming" Pres Bush? I guess I’m trying to figure out what is “blame” versus what is recognition of strategic choices or inadequate resourcing decisions? How do you differentiate “blame” from the latter? /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

LOL! (I think I know to what you're referring - I'm impressed & flattered if my thinking is correct.

Now you are going to stop in and say "Hello" this time, right? Are you willing to come up to Teller County? I won't have a vehicle. We're at 10k MSL west of Pikes. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Thanks for the starting the thread. Interesting to observe another country's domestic politics. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

20 October 2009 On Israel: Perspective of Middle East that Affects Israel’s Global Perspective Begins by notes the importance of academic & military perspective, political and practical Repeatedly asserts that Israel is located in a “tough neighborhood”, started the discussion by noting that most other states surrounding it still fail to recognize Israel as a state. Beyond Conventional Warfare Suggests that there has been a divergent transition in the “tough neighborhood” from conventional warfare, which its neighbors recognize that will not be a means to defeat Israel to (1) “sub-conventional warfare,” i.e., terrorism and “homicide” bombers [more commonly called ‘asymmetric warfare’]; and (2) “super-conventional” warfare, i.e., missiles (Shahab) and WMD. I think it’s interesting, still thinking through the implications of referring to terrorism and WMD/unconventional warfare as small incremental gradients away from conventional warfare as opposed to being completely different categories or generations of warfare, e.g., 4th Generation and 5th Generation warfare, respectively.] Specific challenges to Israel (& implicitly the US/world), Ya’alon cited included, Syria and Iranian chemical weapons (CW), the Saddam Hussayn regimes’ CW & biological weapons, and the “Iranian determination to acquire military nuclear capabilities.” Asserts that “today they [Israel] don’t see any enemy even thinking about the conventional option [as a means to challenge Israel]. They [Israel’s enemies] recognize that they can’t defeat the IDF.” He cites the military capabilities as a deterrent. [It is, however, a deterrent to *conventional warfare,* which one might argue has been the impetus or pushed others to seek asymmetric or unconventional means to challenge Israel … or as the world witness on 11 September 2001, for al Qa’eda to challenge America … it’s also relevant to combating insurgents/Taliban in Afghanistan and narco-trafficking that funds the Taliban.] Ideological Shift in the Arab Middle East & 1979 Ya’alon asserts theat there has been a “shift in ideology” from the Nasserism of the 1970s and Baathism of Syria [i.e., primarily nationalist in nature, and usually relatively secular/modernist and pan-Arabism [eliminate state of Israel, make the Middle East entirely Arab] to “radical Islam, jihadism.” He cites 1979 as the “year of the shift from national Arab ideology to radical Islam and johadism” and the end of pan-Arabism. Cites Egypt making peace with Israel as a key tipping point [because there could no longer be a unilateral Arab effort to eliminate Israel.] Notes that “coincidentally,” 1979 was also the year of the Shi’a revolution in Iran. Asserts that the emergence of a Shi’a theocratic regime in Iran was a significant factor in spurring/inspiring the emergence of al Qa’eda as a Sunni/Wahabist reactionalry challenge and effort to emulate the Shi’a revolution. [I think that’s an interesting hypothesis and agree that it was *a* variable/factor. Imo, it is not the single factor and his timeline is off a little.] Ya’alon essentially blames (or credits) Iran for the rise of al Qa’eda and the rise of Hamas, [which was created in the mid-1980s … so that I might be more willing to buy … plus I don’t know nearly as much about the history/origin/evolution of Hamas as about al Qa’eda]. [Ya’alon is not the only one to have cited the significance of events that occurred in 1979 for today’s problems and successes: “1979: The Great Backlash” “If you want to understand the surge of politicized religion, post-communist globalization, and laissez-faire economics that has defined our modern era, forget 1968. Forget even 1989. It's 1979 that's the most important year of all. A remarkable chapter in international affairs—and intellectual history—began that year, and it had the strangest group of authors imaginable.” On Israel’s Nuclear Capabilities Ya’along asserts that Israel’s enemies “believe that Israel has a nuclear capability” and sites situations in which that was an effective deterrent: with Egypt in the 6-day war (deterred Egypt from using CW, which they had used against Somalia) and Hussayn during the first Gulf War (all missiles launched toward Israel carried conventional warheads). [Essentially making a subtle argument that Israel and its nuclear weapons have been a force for regional stability. Interesting.] [NB: For those who don’t follow nuclear weapons proliferation/politics closely, Israel’s official policy is “deliberate ambiguity” or “nuclear opacity” w/r/t its estimated 200 or so nuclear weapons. The official US policy is to support Israel’s deliberate ambiguity.] Other Technological Advantages Ya’alon emphasized Israel’s advantages in capabilities were derived from technology in conventional warfare. Suggests that technology has also been an advantage w/r/t fighting “sub-conventional” warfare [i.e., terrorism] through increased capabilities for interdiction and intelligence, e.g., “MASINT, IMIST, SIGINT, OSINT.” [Google ‘em if you want to know the specific acronyms expanded. His citing Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) was most interesting one to me. OSINT has only recently been perceived as having real value within the intelligence community. Over the last 5 or so years, there has been a significant push and what one might call a ‘marketing’ campaign to convey the value of OSINT.] Noted value of C4ISR technology, particularly w/r/t for “operational creativity and flexibility” that enabled Israel to maintain troops ready to deploy immediately against enemies such as Hezbollah. What is More Important Than Firepower Ya’alon asserts that the “weakest link” is the “ability of Israeli society to withstand,” e.g., to tolerate casualties, to withstand scarcity, and he asserts there is a “lack of willingness to sacrifice life,” which Israel’s enemies exploit. Therefore they [e.g., Hezbollah] target civilians rather than the IDF, “which they know they cannot defeat.” In this context/contest, “firepower” is “not the main element to be considered. The ability of society to stand is more important that firepower.” Ya’alon emphasizes the importance of the “soft parts” of national security such as “solidarity” and “resilience.” [The prevailing American, and perhaps even the general western perspective, is that the Israeli civilian population is damned resilient. Guess everything is relative.] Ya’alon cited leadership and education as critical factors. He was critical of what he called “solutionism and now-ism,” i.e., that there is a demand to have a solution now. He specifically cited calls for “peace now” among the Israeli population as an example of this. He noted that it will likely take generations to defeat terrorism … “but a politician has to be elected now, and I am now a politician.” [Essentially critical of the attention span of most of the electorate.] “We should be aware that there is no swift victory but it should be a decisive victory in the long run. To change will require education … such they they [terrorists/radical Salafists] see no hope in defeating Israel or US. It is the long run struggle of ideas and values … and physical conflict.” [I was struck by how much he emphasized education and acknowledged the role of soft power, something that was dismissed and ridiculed at times by the GW Bush administration, i.e., that just killing “terrorists” will not make us [America, Israel, western world] safe from terrorism and that why what the world thinks of America matters because it makes executing US foreign policy a lot easier in terms of $$$, deployed uniformed military, and other US interests.] On the Goldstone Report Ya’alon asserts that “they [this one was not really clear who “they” meant … could have been Israel’s enemies, the UN, or some combination of both & others] are trying to delegitimize the IDF through lies and propaganda [regarding what he maintains were the IDF’s “actions to defend itself”]. He cites the outcome of the Goldstone report “is to encourage terrorism,” and he suggests that the Goldstone report and related actions/sentiments represent a “moral threat” to Israel … (and to the US by implication.) [The tone of the discussion on the Goldstone report as political (rather than as a search for facts) reminded me in way (some not *all*) of controversies surrounding the attempt to cover-up Pat Tillman’s freindly fire death.] Ya’alon notes that enemies of Israel, they [Israel] “are the ‘minor Satan’ and America is the ‘great Satan’.” Ya’alon asserts that there is a “clash of civilizations occurring against those wanting to change the world order, [who] claim to impose their version of Islam first in the Middle East, and then all over the world.” [Yes, that pretty much is the stated goal of radical Salafists … the correlation with the Gladstone report is spurious, imo.] He asserts that the “western world must stand and fight back now [against radical Salafists].” [I wanted to ask how he reconciled that directive with his other comments regarding what he called ‘now-ism’.] Defining Security In response to a question regarding whether Israel could live with another nuclear state in the Middle East, Ya’alon asserts that “the best was to have security is to enjoy peace with your neighbors. If peace is unable [to be achieved], you should be able to deter your neighbors now and in the future. There are rumors that we [Israel] have nuclear capability. … If they [the rumors] are right, I believe we have demonstrated responsibility [w/r/t being a nuclear weapons state]. Israel will not be the first to use nuclear weapons … anytime.” He notes that Israel’s “declared goal [is a commitment] to not allow military nuclear capability by the [Iranian] regime.” He then asserted that if Iran is likely to go nuclear, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Libya, and others [why no mention of Turkey?] will reconsider their policies [currently as of not wanting nuclear weapons] Ya’alon asserts that “you can find Iran’s fingerprints in all destabilized regions, in Afghanistan … in Iraq supporting Shi’a militants, and challenging the government in Yemen [in Yemen a Sunni regime controls the government while the population is majority Shi’a], in Lebanon …, in Syria, in Somalia ….” We discussed Iranian involvement in smuggling activities. On the US Policy Toward Iran Ya’alon characterized US policy toward Iran as “surrender” and giving into “black mail.” He acknowledged the difficult situation that the US would have in finding ground troops for an invasion of Iran due to current deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. He advocates for imposition of political isolation and targeted economic sanctions with a credible military option [which actually sounds a lot like US policy toward Iran … he couldn’t/wouldn’t really elaborate what he wanted the US to do differently specifically, which was frustrating and less than satisfying from my perspective.] When asked how he would propose dealing with the unlikely willingness of China to agree to sanctioning Iran, Ya’alon asserted that the sanctions should target those areas “dominated by the west,” such as the banking system and gasoline refinement [gasoline refinement and Iran’s lack of modern energy infrastructure has been a topic invoked here previously Ya’alon cited the 2003 suspension of Iran’s program toward nuclear weaponization as cited in the (US) 2005 NIE as evidence that Iran thought there might be a Phase III by the US, i.e., a ground invasion of Iran led by the US, after Afghanistan and Iraq. Ya’alon opposes all bargaining with Iran but acknowledges that it may be a tactical choice to enable allies to come on board (i.e., they will satisfy their own domestic political needs). [He didn’t specify to what end, whether sanctions, airstrikes, or a ground invasion, or all three.] On the Iranian Regime Ya’alon stated that he believes that the current Iranian regime is “vulnerable” to internal instability” and cites Iran’s domestic economy (inflation, unemployment, and worker strikes), arrest of journalists in Iran, and restrictions of information and communication technologies such as the internet. He asserted that he thought an external strike on Iran would embolden domestic challenges within Iran rather than strengthen the current regimes. He did not think that the majority of the Iranian population would come together against an external threat. [If the actor making strikes against Iran is Israel, I think Ya’alon is completely wrong – that would, imo, strengthen, and perhaps even indefinitely solidify, the current Iranian regime. If it was a US led-ground invasion, I give it about a 90% probability of strengthening the current regime; if airstrikes, ~70-80% chance. If allied-led, ~50% chance.] Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Earlier this week I had the opportunity to meet with the Israeli Minister of Strategic Affairs, Moshe “Bogey” Ya’alon , a position somewhat akin to US National Security Advisor, during his visit to the US. He’s also the Vice Prime Minister in the current coalition government, part of the center right Likud party, and a retired 3-star general from IDF/former Chief of the IDF. He’s a former Para-trooper too. He has a reputation for being a somewhat controversial figure, e.g., called a war criminal by some in England for his role in the shelling of Qana, Lebanon in response to Hezbollah rockets, and for controversial/incendiary remarks. While the meeting was not off-the-record, there was no media coverage … so I can’t link to some news article. The primary issue of discussion was Iran and the nuclear program. Also talked about Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, and Somalia. Both during the more formal meetings and over dinner, the Israel-Palestinian conflict did not come up. One of my interns took notes and did the first round of typing. I then compared them to my notes and recollections and edited, something which is SOP for me. A few folks via PMs had expressed interests in reading excerpts. Suspects others might as well. Others … well, just click the button to jump back to forum main page.

I'm now living in my 6th State (if you count SoCal & NorCal as two different States ), but I consider a 7th State, Colorado, to be home. Already looking forward to going home for Thanksgiving.

Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Not much else I can say other than "+1." Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Yesterday afternoon I gave a talk on nuclear proliferation. Going into the Q&A period I’m thinking the first question is going to be on Iran’s program or DPRK or terrorism. No, the first question was on the MOP reprogramming docs stories. ... Having looked at the primary documents, it made me look even better than I already did -[at myself] to be able to immediately reference the DD1145’s and cite the request was for only 16% over the already approved 2009 DoD budget. Pretty cool, imo. If you hadn’t posted the story the first time & [SkyChimp] a week later, I may never have noticed. Thanks.

Apparently I am unable to either read or count this afternoon. How is this, the first post, i.e., how something starts: “attacking Obama's opponents”? Compare that with how Darius began his parallel post? /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Awe ... . Thanks!

Oh this could be fun … so many people … To start, with [ParaFrog] cause that means we’re both in Afghanistan. With Marc [rushmc] drinking Glenmorangie. With Keith [BIGUN] asking him lots of questions about his experiences in Central America and just talking about everything from nanotechnology to history to starry nights. Hiking in the redwoods with Jason [downwardspiral] and sparring intellectually. Hiking in Texas with [JohnRich] … someplace that doesn’t require too much concentration cause I suspect we’re going to be arguing discussing intensely most of the time. Plotting our takeover of the world, uh hanging out with Wendy and Jeanne. Shooting with Randy [warpedskydiver] and then talking to his daughter’s Girl Scout troop later (not about shooting). Eating homemade Italian food with Jimmy [jimmytavino]. As a passenger in [Vortexring]’s helicopter … & so I can take my own pictures of those mountains. Jumping at Archway with Tomas [freeflychile] and Gary [whatever Peek’s dz.com user name is] … because I miss jumping at Archway & the people there. And I’m sure that I’ve missed quite a few someones. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

More like Into Thin Air and Into the Wild, imo. It's 100 pages longer than Into Thin Air too. Have not read Under the Banner of Heaven. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Anyone else reading Jon Krakauer’s latest, Where Men Win Glory: The Odyssey of Pat Tillman? Like most of Krakauer’s previous works, e.g., Into Thin Air, it’s exceedingly readable and not overly scholarly, i.e., it's Stairmaster reading. C-SPAN’s Book TV program featured an hour-long interview with Krakauer in September, which is also available as a podcast. In the book & the interview, Krakauer makes some assertion that depending on your perspective one might call revelatory or incendiary. Most (?) of us are familiar with the Tillman’s death. Krakauer suggests that there were similar friendly fire incidents related to the deaths of 18 Marines in the battle of Nasirayah (~24min on the interview/Chapter 24 of the book). Krakauer is not the first to write about it, e.g., BBC article from 2003. Nasirayah may be better known as the battle during which Jessica Lynch was captured. Overall, the book is incredibly complimentary to Tillman and to the other soldiers with whom he trained and served. Less so w/r/t the institutional Army, which at its poorest might also be called the bureaucracy. (At its best, it's a highly effective organization.) Parts of it seem to resonate with LTC Paul Yingling’s 2007 Armed Forces Journal article, “A Failure of Generalship,” which has been cited/discussed here previously. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Have you found any examples of “outright lies” yet? What you suggested previously were anecdotal differences of opinion or possibly factual errors, in one case that you cited it appears the Tax Foundation recalculated/did their own analysis of OECD data (numbers), which is fine, even good (!). That’s why OECD releases data not just analysis. The OECD report, “Growing Unequal? Income Distribution and Poverty in OECD Countries” also seems to suggest from a quick glance that the OECD had somewhat different conclusions than the Tax Foundation, e.g., “the gap between rich and poor and the number of people below the poverty line have both grown over the past two decades.” It’s also not clear to me that either analysis (or the data itself) considered statutory or actual tax rates. E.g., for corporate taxes it is known that the differences matter. It’s completely reasonable that an economics scholar would not be familiar with the Tax Foundation’s own (re-)analysis. I don’t consider those lies, much less outright lies. Perhaps you do? And maybe that’s a larger issue of media sensationalism? What previously (?) or more precisely could be called differences in opinion or at times, simple factual error (like the one I cited from a FoxNews.com story earlier in this thread; I don’t consider that a “lie” just an simple error) are now “lies.” “Lie” implies intentional misleading or intent to deceive to me. Calling something a lie, much less an “outright lie,” does change the tone of message tho'. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Sometimes I wonder if part of the problem is semantics? Maybe that's not the best word either. Maybe it's precision in choice of words? What is an error or differing opinion gets put forth as a "lie". Lieing is intentional misrepresentation and much more polarizing. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

In general, I like FoxNews.Com. Liking it doesn’t necessarily correlate with “fair & balanced.” If I thought it was “total crap” without any value, either, even if only humor, I wouldn’t read it/waste my time. Like [DrewEckhardt] I don’t regularly watch the cable news program since I don’t have cable at home. If I do watch it, it’s online or while traveling/at a hotel. I like FoxNews.com because the stories do sometimes/often -- not always -- reflect/contain a partisan or ideological perspective, imo. It's also in many ways the most populist, imo. Similarly I like “Democracy NOW,” which offers a very different end of the political spectrum. That’s the political counter-weight to Fox News not ABC, CNN, or NPR (can’t speak to MSNBC), imo. I like both attempting to, occasionally assertively-to-aggressively, challenging the political elites, including but not limited to President Obama. I (used to really) like the National Review Online as a conservative site reflecting a more elite persective. I'm also a big fan of foreign news sources, including but not limited to British and other western European sources for analysis of US politics as well as international events/issues. E.g., if I want news on a specific incident in Pakistan, I like to see what both Dawn and The Hindu report. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying