Network Analysis and the Warrior

Alberto Lazlo Barabasi, a physics professor at Notre Dame, has put forward some interesting hypothesis about networks, and how they relate to the world. What constitutes a network? A system of links and nodes. What are links? Anything that connects nodes. What are nodes? A node can be a computer, a person, an insect.......

Network analysis and the associated rules, theories and laws, apply to the world of combat. Most persons in the military have heard of the buzz word NETWORK CENTRIC. This term means that a system should pass information to all nodes, in order to ensure that the right information has made it to the right person at the right time. This concept is great, however we have to remember that we are not the only ones employing it. Terrorists, China....just about everyone else in the world who uses a telephone, the internet or other forms of passing information, are network centric.

Partition Problem

There has been a lot of talk in the news lately about the three options put forward by the Pentagon...called Go Long, Go Big or Go Home. Well the military strategists on the evening news put forward a fourth option called the Partition. Essentially this means a partitioning of Iraq along tribal/religous lines to bring about peace.

From my perspective, I don't think this will create the peace desired in Iraq. Let's say for a moment that we do partition Iraq. Great, now we have a multiple of areas that will be fighting with each other. Additionally, weaker states may be taken over by stronger states putting us back to where we started. A failed nation.

What we have in Iraq are the Kurds in the north, and the Sunnis and Shia's in the middle portion. How their current government is set up is beyond me, but it sounds confusing.

And here is another thing that I don't understand, someone in the press stated that our troops need to be redeployed to the border areas. Was this not done to begin with? Is this really going to bring out victory if it is done? To the west of Baghdad there is nothing, do we really need to secure this nothingness or can we just secure Baghdad and be happy?

Finally, there is a lot of talk about the violence in Iraq being caused by sectarian groups. However, what goes unsaid is the effect of other units or countries who are encouraging this violence. In Meet The Press today Joe Lieberman hit the nail on the head, but his opponent did not. His opponent (whose name escapes me) stated that Iran and Syria had national interests in Iraq and that they did not want to have a failed state on their borders...additionally, Iran had helped us in Afghanistan. The Senator has it wrong, Iran and Syria want to see a failed state beside them because when it fails, they can take it over or at least insert their influence. Although Iran did help us with Afghanistan, I remember quite a few border incursions and displays of force done against Iran while I flew in Afghanistan. I don't think Iran was being that helpful.

CNN in the Wrong Place

After watching Reporting War this week on CNN, I am certain they have missed the point of the war. This war is not going on only in Iraq, but also in America, Europe, Britain and all around the world. CNN needs to pull their head from their arse and start reporting in more areas besides Baghdad.

The definition of Jihad...

So what have I learned today about the Future Jihad from Walid Phares? In his opinion the word Jihad has been mis-diagnosed in the west....as has the term Democracy in the Middle East (Madrassa teaching). The term Jihad forms a sixth, unofficial pillar of Islam. This unofficial pillar came about in the early days of Islam when the government needed to mobilize their people in defense of the state. Whether that defense was military in nature or otherwise is open, Jihad means "effort" and is not constrained to military applications.

Bottom line is that the thought that Jihad is an "inner struggle" is a western line of thinking not in line with that of Islam. According to the author, this definition came about from apologists in the west, as well as poor translators. Jihad is only a pilar of Islam when the circumstances are correct and a person in legitimate authority has declared Jihad to be.

One more thing, religon and politics are one in the same in the world of Islam. So, essentially every time we ask for Saudi Arabia to do something like give women rights, we are pretty much asking them to change their religon. Now I do believe in rights for women, I will support Condi for President any time. But, how we carry our foreign policy in the Mid-East...I am hoping...is done in light of this...Right? My question is...is it more beneficial to send someone like Condi to Saudi and Iraq for negotiations, or should we have a head Islamic ambassador? Unfortunately that would cross the lines of state sponsored religon probably, but could some permutation be reached to help make more headway in the middle-east? Another question, since Madrassas have been teaching that Democracy is not right and sinful, why did President Bush and others believe that Iraqis would celebrate our invasion? While I had hoped this would be the case, looking back, I think I was blinded and hoping that someone in government had the inside scoop.

We Don't Wear the Poppy!

It looks like the DNC has attempted to emulate Reuters. A photo has surfaced on their website of a supposed US Army soldier. In reality, looking at the uniform gives away the fact that this is not in any way a US Soldier. The US military does not wear the Poppy (red flower on the lapel). That is a tradition of the British and Canadian armies relating back to Flanders Field in World War I. I have some Canadian buddies at work, I wonder how they would feel about this:)

Here is the story from Michelle Malkin
Here is some history on the Poppy
Trackback

New Nuclear Weapons Free Zone

Here is an interesting article about a Nuclear Weapons Free Zone in central asia. How this came about I don't know.....

230 Million to Lebanon through a Charity

President Bush has started a public/private partnership to provide 230 million dollars to help rebuild Lebanon. This started as four CEOs sent to Lebanon to see where they needed help. Today, Bush put a dollar amount to it and set out that a charity will administer the cash. This will certainly help the US credibility overseas...however it is not getting any press play. You sure don't see France coughing up 230 million to help out....they cannot even get 2000 soldiers.

http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/73048.htm

US Support to Re-Build Lebanon

After seeing Hizoballah passing out US currency to folks whose homes were destroyed by the Israeli attacks, I have to admit that I felt like we (the west) were loosing the hearts and minds of people in the region.

Today, I came across this State Department report that had me do a complete 180. President Bush has assembled 4 CEOs of prominent companies to tour Lebanon and make a recommendation to him personally about how the US can best help out.

In other words, how can the US help re-build Lebanon. It was surprising to see that two of the CEOs are connected to IT technology (Intel and Cisco), a third is connected to oil (Occidental Petroleum) and the fourth is from Ghafari Inc. The mainstream media does not seem to be too interested in this story of good-will. No one does.

US-Lebanon Support