Well since you do know Feos, have they failed or been a success?FEOS wrote:
Put up or shut up. m8.
You have to know what those things are before you can say whether or not they've failed.
I never claimed to know them all.AussieReaper wrote:
Well since you do know Feos, have they failed or been a success?FEOS wrote:
Put up or shut up. m8.
You have to know what those things are before you can say whether or not they've failed.
I know some that have succeeded, others that haven't.
Overall, I'd say the balance is more on the success side than on the fail side.
But then, I'm not the one claiming it's been an abject failure without providing anything more than an increase in casualties, am I?
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Well that's true.FEOS wrote:
I never claimed to know them all.AussieReaper wrote:
Well since you do know Feos, have they failed or been a success?FEOS wrote:
Put up or shut up. m8.
You have to know what those things are before you can say whether or not they've failed.
I know some that have succeeded, others that haven't.
Overall, I'd say the balance is more on the success side than on the fail side.
But then, I'm not the one claiming it's been an abject failure without providing anything more than an increase in casualties, am I?
But then, you didn't mention anything specific at all and offer nothing but a vague "some have, some haven't", I'll hedge my bets approach.
You're claiming it's a success without providing anything more than.... nothing.
Inlight me SirFEOS wrote:
Put up or shut up. m8.Beduin wrote:
Failed ALL of it.. I dare you m8FEOS wrote:
Do you even know what the goals are?
Do you refer to strategic goals, operational goals, or tactical goals? Do you refer to political goals or military goals? Do you refer to the goals of the Afghan government or the US?
Before you start claiming something has failed, you have to understand the metrics involved.
You have to know what those things are before you can say whether or not they've failed.
الشعب يريد اسقاط النظام
...show me the schematic
...show me the schematic
Don't need to be qualified, just need to look at the record of the US Army.FEOS wrote:
And you are qualified to make that judgment how?
And if Gunslinger is an example of a PSYOP expert then god help america.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2009-07-23 06:39:53)
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
This post was so fundamentally flawed and inaccurate that despite my best efforts to cover each of your points comprehensively, the corrections were so basic that I essentially would have had to type out the entirety of my previous post in simpler terms. Since you continue the theme of your previous posts by frivolously misrepresenting and misconstruing my arguments, and doing so in an arrogant, condescending and narcissistic tone instead of simply addressing the points as is, in an adult manner, I really can't find the motivation to go through that kind of trouble.FEOS wrote:
I offered another possibility based on experience. And you twisted off about "arrogance" because that possibility conflicted with your own preconception...which was based on nothing but a single news report.mikkel wrote:
You're obviously very irate, but this is bordering on the ridiculous. For the sake of this thread, you really ought to read the last two posts again. The whole point is that you're offering precisely the same speculative arguments as the rest of us are, despite your outburst against doing just that. Your hissy fit is the result of a gross misunderstanding of what this debate forum is about, and you don't even attempt to vindicate it by posting to your own standards.
As to "standards": I posted two real-world examples of how PSYOP messages can be misinterpreted either by media (Somalia) or the targeted audience (Iraq). Both showed that dialectic nuance in languages can make all the difference in the world.
And you called THAT arrogant. Let's talk about posting standards, shall we?I never said I had involvement with THESE particular handbills. I never implied that I did. My experience (direct experience) was in OEF and OIF some years back. My experience (indirect) since then has been working directly with PSYOP planners--those who develop themes and messages. I have been trained in their planning methodology and processes.mikkel wrote:
You don't even attempt to suggest that you had any sort of involvement with the creation of these images, or that you have any sort of credible testimony contrary to the speculations made, yet you credit yourself as being "informed". If you want to make informed opinions to the satisfaction of the rest of us, you need to qualify your involvement, which you haven't even attempted to.FEOS wrote:
You have no clue if I have direct knowledge or not. And since it can't be sourced to your satisfaction, you can sit there in your arrogant, uninformed manner and cast aspersions on those who actually ARE informed (whether arrogant or not). And because it can't be sourced to your satisfaction, you won't open your arrogant mind enough to--just maybe--learn a little bit from someone who DOES have the experience you don't.
Again, I never said I was directly involved in THESE images. I merely offered an alternative to the view that "zomg teh US militaries are threatening innocent villagers cuz teh US is a bunch of mad-dog killerz!" A view which is clearly underinformed (very few here have any clue what PSYOP is truly about), reactionary, and based on a single media report...whose author clearly is underinformed on the topic, as well.
But offering experienced alternative views is apparently "arrogant". I'll keep that in mind for later.Bullshit. See above.mikkel wrote:
You claim to have information and experience, but so far what you've offered to establish qualification is that you "work around" people who you assume were involved in the creation of the messages. That makes just about the same basis for informed opinion as "working around military types" would make, had the debate been on the undisclosed details of some military action somewhere.Bullshit. See above.mikkel wrote:
You seem to think that you can participate in a debate and have your unsubstantiated word considered law based on claimed credentials that include neither direct nor indirect involvement in the topic of discussion, while claiming others to be arrogant.Bullshit. See above.mikkel wrote:
I'd be happy to learn about the topic from someone who could, reliably and factually, recount the details that are subject to speculation in this thread, but you're simply not that person.
You'd be happy to have someone reinforce your preconceptions. You're not at all happy to have anyone challenge them.pot, kettle.mikkel wrote:
This is no place to vent your narcissism.FEOS wrote:
So go ahead and willingly wallow in your arrogant ignorance on this topic. I really couldn't care less at this point.
I'm not going to be dragged into a contest of insults.
I am, of course, still willing to discuss this with anyone who can do so without resorting to these methods, regardless of how much their view conflicts with mine.
Last edited by mikkel (2009-07-23 09:33:38)
Which is exactly as much as anyone else is providing for the opposite position. So if that makes my position invalid, it must make theirs invalid as well, no?AussieReaper wrote:
Well that's true.FEOS wrote:
I never claimed to know them all.AussieReaper wrote:
Well since you do know Feos, have they failed or been a success?
I know some that have succeeded, others that haven't.
Overall, I'd say the balance is more on the success side than on the fail side.
But then, I'm not the one claiming it's been an abject failure without providing anything more than an increase in casualties, am I?
But then, you didn't mention anything specific at all and offer nothing but a vague "some have, some haven't", I'll hedge my bets approach.
You're claiming it's a success without providing anything more than.... nothing.
Ain't logic a bitch?
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
The burden of proof of failure is on you, not me. It's your claim, not mine.Beduin wrote:
Inlight me SirFEOS wrote:
Put up or shut up. m8.Beduin wrote:
Failed ALL of it.. I dare you m8
You have to know what those things are before you can say whether or not they've failed.
Point out which objectives have either not been met or are not seeing positive progress.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
It helps if you have some level of understanding of PSYOP and the planning, targeting, execution, and assessment processes. The record of the US Army writ large is not a valid metric. Particularly when you consider that out of the millions and millions of messages put out, people can only hone in on a handful that are problematic--particularly when outside the larger context of the operation.Dilbert_X wrote:
Don't need to be qualified, just need to look at the record of the US Army.FEOS wrote:
And you are qualified to make that judgment how?
And if Gunslinger is an example of a PSYOP expert then god help america.
The numbers simply don't favor your position.
As for GS's approach on these forums...I'm willing to bet professionally he (and many others here) is completely different than his online persona.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Yes. It's so much easier to just not respond than to develop a cogent argument and defend your uninformed original position.mikkel wrote:
This post was so fundamentally flawed and inaccurate that despite my best efforts to cover each of your points comprehensively, the corrections were so basic that I essentially would have had to type out the entirety of my previous post in simpler terms. Since you continue the theme of your previous posts by frivolously misrepresenting and misconstruing my arguments, and doing so in an arrogant, condescending and narcissistic tone instead of simply addressing the points as is, in an adult manner, I really can't find the motivation to go through that kind of trouble.
I'm not going to be dragged into a contest of insults.
I am, of course, still willing to discuss this with anyone who can do so without resorting to these methods, regardless of how much their view conflicts with mine.
The points were addressed in an adult manner. You chose to call me arrogant. If you can't deal with the ramifications of your posts, then gtfo.
Facts were provided. Whether you choose to believe them or not does not make them less true. Whether you choose to have a little intellectual integrity and actually critically examine your own position does not make your position less flawed.
The facts of the matter are that you developed an opinion on this particular message with nothing more in background than the message as reported by the media. When presented with the possibility that there is a larger or different context that the reporter may simply not have, you call me arrogant. You don't address the post. You don't address the possibility. You call me arrogant and dismiss my input on the topic, even though it is definitely better informed than your own. That's not arrogance, that's fact. Just as if you were to post insight based on your professional experience--particularly if it were different than my own--it would mean your opinion on the matter would be more informed than my own.
The difference being that I would take your opinion into account and examine my own preconceptions to see if I may have misjudged. It's called intellectual honesty/integrity. Introspection. Try it some time.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
You reckon you're better informed, but you're on the inside looking out.FEOS wrote:
You call me arrogant and dismiss my input on the topic, even though it is definitely better informed than your own.
Anyway, you dismiss other peoples views when they are clearly much better informed than you.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
No, I'm not on the inside. I'm not at all involved with current influence operations going on in theater.Dilbert_X wrote:
You reckon you're better informed, but you're on the inside looking out.FEOS wrote:
You call me arrogant and dismiss my input on the topic, even though it is definitely better informed than your own.
Examples?Dilbert_X wrote:
Anyway, you dismiss other peoples views when they are clearly much better informed than you.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
You're on the inside of the US military.FEOS wrote:
No, I'm not on the inside.
Examples - How to go about making EFPs for one.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
That hardly makes me "on the inside" of this particular issue.Dilbert_X wrote:
You're on the inside of the US military.FEOS wrote:
No, I'm not on the inside.
No, I meant an example that proved your point. Not just a random, made-up example.Dilbert_X wrote:
Examples - How to go about making EFPs for one.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
It makes you an insider when it comes to believing your colleagues over people with a wider view.
Pretty sure that I, as a mechanical engineer with experience of design and manufacture of obscure and varied gizmos, have a better idea of the state of manufacturing technology and available knowledge for EFPs than you do.
And yet you dismiss my input as you dismiss everyone elses.
Pretty sure that I, as a mechanical engineer with experience of design and manufacture of obscure and varied gizmos, have a better idea of the state of manufacturing technology and available knowledge for EFPs than you do.
And yet you dismiss my input as you dismiss everyone elses.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
And how would a less-informed view be a "wider view"? I suppose an infant then has the widest view of all and any ideas they throw out should be clung to as gospel...according to your logic.Dilbert_X wrote:
It makes you an insider when it comes to believing your colleagues over people with a wider view.
Pretty sure your opinion is rather arrogant, as you have no idea of my background on the topic.Dilbert_X wrote:
Pretty sure that I, as a mechanical engineer with experience of design and manufacture of obscure and varied gizmos, have a better idea of the state of manufacturing technology and available knowledge for EFPs than you do.
And yet you dismiss my input as you dismiss everyone elses.
Reading some books =/= experience on a topic.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Sometimes you have to do bad things to do good things.Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
So you would be fine about killing 32,000,000 innocent people?twoblacklines wrote:
why cant they just drop a load of 2000lb bombs on every village. war won, job jobbed. After all it seems perfectly fair for them to kill US civillians, and in fact in 9/11 only civillians were targeted by bin laden, no military personel.
I'd rather just take out the bad guys (including you, cos you sound just as bad as them)twoblacklines wrote:
Sometimes you have to do bad things to do good things.Little BaBy JESUS wrote:
So you would be fine about killing 32,000,000 innocent people?twoblacklines wrote:
why cant they just drop a load of 2000lb bombs on every village. war won, job jobbed. After all it seems perfectly fair for them to kill US civillians, and in fact in 9/11 only civillians were targeted by bin laden, no military personel.
and what makes you better than all the terrorists out there?twoblacklines wrote:
why cant they just drop a load of 2000lb bombs on every village. war won, job jobbed. After all it seems perfectly fair for them to kill US civillians, and in fact in 9/11 only civillians were targeted by bin laden, no military personel.
So much for progression eh? We kick out the taliban to.....have our puppet behave just like them....oppps no at least the taliban wouldn't let her go hungry if she had a headache. lawl.
An Afghan bill allowing a husband to starve his wife if she refuses to have sex has been published in the official gazette and become law.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8204207.stm
An Afghan bill allowing a husband to starve his wife if she refuses to have sex has been published in the official gazette and become law.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/8204207.stm
Last edited by m3thod (2009-08-16 12:25:47)
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
Afghanistan: second only to Sudan in its usefulness for bomb testing.
no wai dude. Afghanistan is where it's at! From the same article:
It allows a man to withhold food from his wife if she refuses his sexual demands; a woman must get her husband's permission to work; and fathers and grandfathers are given exclusive custody of children.
woooooooooooohooooooooooooooo talibans, IED's and opium here i come baby!
It allows a man to withhold food from his wife if she refuses his sexual demands; a woman must get her husband's permission to work; and fathers and grandfathers are given exclusive custody of children.
woooooooooooohooooooooooooooo talibans, IED's and opium here i come baby!
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
Pretty much. It's proof positive that when you have a shithole country to deal with, you go in, bomb the shit out of the place, and then leave. These people aren't worth losing soldiers over. The same goes for Iraq.m3thod wrote:
no wai dude. Afghanistan is where it's at! From the same article:
It allows a man to withhold food from his wife if she refuses his sexual demands; a woman must get her husband's permission to work; and fathers and grandfathers are given exclusive custody of children.
woooooooooooohooooooooooooooo talibans, IED's and opium here i come baby!
Not if you're smart you don't. BTW You sound like Dr Mengele.Sometimes you have to do bad things to do good things.
Being qualified in something and working in the field for 15 years =/= having a smattering.FEOS wrote:
Reading some books =/= experience on a topic.
PS I can buy stuff off the internet too
http://www.campaigncasuals.com/coiedtafotro.html
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2009-08-18 06:40:01)
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
yes, bc everyone in afganistan knows where he is. he is most likely in pakistan, so...ATG wrote:
How about; " you have 48 hours to produce OBL or then we bomb the hell out of you " and then we get the bleep out?