I don’t think a 5GW approach is needed to AL-Qaeda in Afghanistan. Kinetics is needed.

Now an anti-Al-Qada 5GW approach is needed partially in Pakistan, partially in the US and fully toward the world wide Muslim community. Note I did not say “against” the world wide Muslim community.

Nothing could bring more misery and wasted potential to the world wide Muslim community fulfillment of AL-Qada type goals and assumption of AL-Qada type folks to leadership positions.

The trick is to have the world wide Muslim community come to think that way seemingly “on their own”.

Destruction is harder then re-direction/nudging.

Some enemies need destruction though…or mostly being destroyed.

I am 21 years old and doing my bachelors at Columbia.

I am the sort of guy who loves to seek recent things. Right now I am manufacturing my hold photovoltaic panels. I’m managing it all by myself without the help of my men. I’m using the internet as the only path to acheive this. I discovered a truly amazing website which explains how to contruct pv panels and so on. The web site explains all the steps involved in building pv panels.

I’m not sure about how precise the information given there is. If some experts over here who have experience with these things can have a see and give your feedback in the page it would be grand and I’d extremely value it.

Tnx for reading this. U guys rock.

– OH FOR GOD’S SAKE NO would be the reply.

And why would that be the reply? Because most politcos, by far the vast majority, are still 4GW mind-set: to them, it’s an “us vs. them, make a choice dammit!” kind of world.

This reminds me of an old, sometimes-half-mocked D5GW post called “A Kinder, Gentler War?” –

“The belief that utter destruction of our foes is possible, or else that sufficient kinetic force will either force them to our way of thinking or fence them in, is founded upon the notion that what goes into the OODA loop of our foe comes out without interference from his reasoning. I.e., it is the grossest form of Objectivism possible, entirely entrenched in the assumption that what is done to the physical world will have a direct, predictable result in shaping the enemy’s activity (whether he dies or submits), as if all enemies are merely carbon copy constructs of our own imagining. It is a linear epistemology; and those with the most faith in kinetic force tend to be those who overlook complexity and confluential processes, preferring to eliminate complexity by obliterating whatever does not hold to their line of sight.”

I think Obama’s statement re: “victory” might be related to this idea. (I say this not knowing the context or, in fact, ever having seen that statement before this thread.) I.e., the type of WWII “victory” most people imagine when they imagine victory is not likely to happen in the current conflict because this ain’t your grampy’s war. And so,

“Can entrenched opponents in our complex, interconnected and diverse world be either (a) utterly destroyed, (b) forced to join our side, or (c) fenced in? If the answer to all of these is No, then alternative methods must be found for neutralizing them. Co-optation, or a willingness to include our opponents in our overall game plan, is difficult to oppose, if it actually occurs. If we do our design work in a way that apparently also benefits our opponents, their argument against our design will be neutralized; they must become ‘hands in the field’ working cooperatively unless they are ardently suicidal.”

–or, this gets back to the old idea that, rather than try to destroy a 4GW force, attempt to change it.

Right now, I don’t think this generation of Dem party national leaders can not be trusted on natrional security issues. The Dems are not the Party of Truman and Scoop Jackson anymore. On security, they are the party of VP Wallace and McGovern.

Sort of. Over time, the training of Afgani forces would allow US forces to be replaced with more and more Afgani forces. Eventually the Taliban would degrade into a small narco-poppy crime movement.

“I’m always worried about using the word ‘victory,’ because, you know, it invokes this notion of Emperor Hirohito coming down and signing a surrender to MacArthur,”

- Barack Obama

He doesn’t even want to defeat the enemy anymore. He wants them degraded instead. What degradation normal American soldiers and Marines could inflict on pederests and goat/donkey rapers remains to be seen. More panties on the head?

Of course, Google might be doing this already.

The difference, for me, would be between 1) taking popular sites that spring up on their own, analyzing the cross-patterns for clues (which no doubt already happens), and 2) creating specific sites to focus and narrow down general revelations to something useful & already determined.

I guess the show is off till the spring. I may watch it again, unless other TV interferes.

There are certainly shades of a 5GWish something going on.

However, right now my biggest complaint about the show is that the developers seem to have forgotten that the internet and mass media have occurred. The use of the one news anchor to represent that phenomenon is juvenile. What I mean is this: it only takes the capture of 1 V, or the complicity of one of the traitor V’s, to blow everything wide open. Just cut half the face off, while filming that, or taking photos, and post it on the Internet where it would go viral. Done deal.

I suspect, and fear, that the developers may be aware of this and will show how the V’s monitor and control the internet and all media sources (similar to control of the 911 dispatch they’ve displayed) — a la a suped-up China. I think that would be going too far in the movie; nonetheless, the resistance could easily fall back to a simpler technology and slap posters of the Big Reveal all over major cities (think Obama as Joker) and distribute fliers a la certain over-eager Christian proselytizers.

http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/11/11/1336200

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/drbaehr/2009/11/06/v-teaches-us-to-combat-false-saviors/