This is Jeff Carr's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Jeff Carr's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Jeff Carr
Recent Activity
I wasn't there, although I wish I had attended. Thanks for capturing the spirit of it with such a thought-provoking post, Jim. Going to go pass it around Twitter now. :-)
Toggle Commented Aug 24, 2009 on Survival of the Best Informed at Limn This
Great post, Jeff. I just pointed to it on Twitter. Your point about channel consolidation and Facebook underscores my concerns about violations of OPSEC on social software by gov employees who are potential targets in adversarial collection efforts.
Toggle Commented Jun 11, 2009 on Prediction: Channel Consolidation at Jeff Jonas
Bob, I so appreciate you taking the time to blog about this conference. I'm particularly hopeful that Ops/Intel teams at JSOC will continue to be supported with Web 2.0 innovations. Looking forward to the next post!
Toggle Commented Aug 13, 2008 on Day One at Synergy Conference at CTOVision
1 reply
I just left a comment at Matt's blog regarding his take on this, and in it I mentioned my concern that Google may tilt search results in favor of Knol listings over other Web pages. Your blog, for example, might fall below your Knol page in a query on Disruptive Technologies. Once I submitted my comment, I checked to see if anyone has noticed such a skewing in their Google search results and --- what a surprise --- Google DOES seem to be doing precisely that. It was discovered by no less an authority than Danny Sullivan. You can read his findings here: http://searchengineland.com/080724-140223.php Dare Obasanjo follows up with other evidence here: http://www.25hoursaday.com/weblog/2008/07/28/GooglesAssaultOnWikipedia.aspx Not good, IMO.
Toggle Commented Jul 29, 2008 on A Google Knol on Disruptive Technology at CTOVision
1 reply
Matt writes: "The bottom-line is that when you set a date for our withdrawal, you will be setting a date for a free Iraq's demise. " So the war can still be lost? I thought everyone is proclaiming that the war has been won. It can't be both. Or perhaps a more accurate statement would be that the war is on track to being won, but we aren't there yet.
Toggle Commented Jul 24, 2008 on Obama Withdrawal at BlackFive
1 reply
Jordan, here's the text on Obama's October 2002 speech against the war: http://usliberals.about.com/od/extraordinaryspeeches/a/Obama2002War.htm In it he lists some of his objections. Not that you'll buy any of them, but there you are.
Toggle Commented Jul 22, 2008 on Obama wrong from the start on Iraq at BlackFive
1 reply
Tom, you need to chill, dude.
Toggle Commented Jul 22, 2008 on Obama wrong from the start on Iraq at BlackFive
1 reply
Jimbo, you seriously can't imagine any rational reason for opposing the invasion of Iraq? How about: insufficient planning Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11 al-Qa'ida wasn't in Iraq at the time of our invasion. there were worse despots in the world besides Saddam - Kim Jong-il, for example, who actually possessed nuclear weapons. And just to rub a little salt in the wound, keep in mind that it will be Obama who will be in office when we can finally pull our troops out of Iraq and it will be Obama who will get the credit for a successful outcome. Just FYI.
Toggle Commented Jul 21, 2008 on Obama wrong from the start on Iraq at BlackFive
1 reply
Tantor, thanks for posting. It's rare to read such a well-thought out assessment on most blogs, let along in the comments section. If you write a blog on this topic, let me know. I'd like to link to it.
Toggle Commented Jul 21, 2008 on Israel announces Winter bombing plans at BlackFive
1 reply
From Drudge, here's what Shipley wants from McCain: ---------------- Shipley, who is on vacation this week, explained his decision not to run the editorial. 'The Obama piece worked for me because it offered new information (it appeared before his speech); while Senator Obama discussed Senator McCain, he also went into detail about his own plans.' Shipley continues: 'It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama's piece. To that end, the article would have to articulate, in concrete terms, how Senator McCain defines victory in Iraq.' -------- That sounds like a good approach to me. According to that quote, McCain can do what Obama did. Articulate his own plan for Iraq and address deficiencies in Obama's plan. What's the big deal?
1 reply
C-Bob, what part of the word "verifiable" don't you understand? Jordan, you can't point to any evidence that supports your opinion about Obama's criticism of the war crossing some imaginary line primarily because you can't document what that line is. To prove your point you'd have to do that first, and then show that Obama has crossed it - and not just once, but repeatedly and with intent to harm (which is what you're claiming). Your view on WMD's in Iraq isn't even worth countering. The people who believe, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary, that our intelligence on WMDs in Iraq was correct might as well join the lunatics of the "Holocaust never occurred" and "9/11 was a government conspiracy" crowd. Your closing paragraph is just a fanciful projection. There are lots of possible scenarios for what might have happened without the monumentally bad decision to stop pursuing bin Laden in Afghanistan and go after Saddam instead - someone who had nothing to do with 9/11.
Toggle Commented Jul 21, 2008 on Obama's fact finding at BlackFive
1 reply
C-Bob, you wrote "Jeff, since you didn't want to bet, and I didn't really care about the hundred, I went ahead and just made the donation today. to wit:" and then you posted something that I guess you imagine is proof of payment. So allow me to clarify for the benefit of my bet with Tom. First, you said I didn't want to bet. Wrong. I already had one bet with Tom, so clearly I DID want to bet. What I didn't want to do was bet with more than one person. Secondly, what you posted isn't proof that you paid anything to anyone. Proof means verifiable proof. Now personally, I don't care if you actually donated money or not, and you're not obligated to prove whether you did or not. I only bring this up so that Tom W is clear on what he'll need to show come November when he needs to pay up, or vice versa if I'm the one who loses.
Toggle Commented Jul 20, 2008 on Obama's fact finding at BlackFive
1 reply
C-Bob, I almost hate to post this given your barely contained excitement (along with most of the Right Whinge blogosphere) over Saddam's old Yellowcake supplies that have recently been sold to Canada. Nevertheless, in the interest of bursting your silly bubble, here's the reality: From Nukes & Spooks http://washingtonbureau.typepad.com/nationalsecurity/2008/07/saddams-uranium.html "July 15, 2008 Saddam's Uranium RadiationLast week, the Iraqi government announced that it had sold 550 tons of natural uranium, a stockpile that dated from Saddam Hussein's regime, to a Canadian company. Does this mean Saddam had WMD after all, as at least a few commentators are now maintaining? Sigh. Let's go through this one ... more ... time. These sorts of stories have popped up every now and then over the last few years. Remember the supposed truckloads of WMD that Saddam sent to Syria in the dying days of his regime? Then there was the report that about 300 munitions containing chemical weapons had been found in Iraq since Saddam's fall from power. Turns out that they dated from the Iran-Iraq war of 1980-88, and had degraded so badly that they were useless. Nothing has emerged to change the basic conclusion of U.S. weapons inspector David Kay, who led a post-invasion effort to find WMD in Iraq. As Kay famously said, "It turns out that we were all wrong." No secret weapons caches have emerged. No Iraqi scientists have come forward to speak of advanced weapons programs. None of the trove of regime documents have detailed a WMD effort that posed a near-term threat to the United States and its allies. So what of the 550 tons of uranium, which was in a raw form known as yellowcake? Well, the first thought that strikes us here at N&S is that if Saddam had all that raw uranium, why would he have been secretly negotiating to buy the exact same thing from Niger, as forged documents purported? One more reason to suspect the Niger caper from the start, something the U.S. government and European intelligence agencies failed to do. Much more importantly, the 550 tons of uranium ore in question wasn't a secret. It was well-known that Iraq had a stored cache of the stuff at its Tuwaitha nuclear complex. Ever since the end of the 1991 Gulf War, the ore had been under the lock and key of the International Atomic Energy Agency. (Ironically, Tuwaitha was looted after the U.S. invasion, when the Bush administration failed to order American armed forces to secure it). More importantly, uranium yellowcake is about as many steps away from a nuclear weapon as a block of marble is from Michelangelo's statue David. You need to do a lot of STUFF to yellowcake to turn it into fissile material. Any nuclear scientists reading this are welcome to chime in, but it basically involves refining the ore, turning it into a gas, and then feeding that gas through a series of centrifuges to separate the particular isotope of uranium that you need. Get enough of that, and you have highly-enriched uranium. Then you can build a bomb. What the Bush administration said before the invasion notwithstanding, Saddam was nowhere close to any of this. We'll explain this all again ... in a few months."
Toggle Commented Jul 20, 2008 on Obama's fact finding at BlackFive
1 reply
Tom W, I posted a reply to you with 5 links but the spam filter grabbed it for moderation so it may or may not appear. At any rate, there's no dearth of supporting evidence for the economic and humanitarian catastrophes occuring in Iraq, nor for the many strategic blunders made, nor for the massive intelligence failures that started it all. Just perform a search under those key words and voila! Jordan, how can you possibly say with a straight face that the troops shouting their support for Obama for President are only doing it because they're afraid of offending their "possible future boss"? Are you kidding me?!? Don't you get that if that were the case (and it isn't), that you'd also have to discount their support for the war for the very same reason (i.e., fear of getting into trouble from their CO for saying otherwise?)? As far as criticizing the war, there are lots of examples of military officers up to and including Generals expressing their own critiques during war time. Surely they would know not to do that if your criticism had any merit at all.
Toggle Commented Jul 20, 2008 on Obama's fact finding at BlackFive
1 reply
LOL!! mcmill1599, I personally don't know any Socialists (myself and Barack Obama included) except for the ones that appear to be hiding under your bed. Say Rich, do you have The Who playing in the background when you write these posts?
Toggle Commented Jul 20, 2008 on Obama's fact finding at BlackFive
1 reply
mcmill1599: Lenin was the architect of a failed economic model. I don't consider him a font of knowledge, and I'm not sure why you would either. Regarding expanding the role of government in our daily lives, if that's your bar to measure the advance of Socialism in the U.S., then you obviously consider Bush a Socialist. Who has expanded the role of the Federal gov't more than he has in the last 8 years?
Toggle Commented Jul 20, 2008 on Obama's fact finding at BlackFive
1 reply
Jordan, you wrote: "last August, 2007, Obama accused troops of "air-raiding villages and killing civilians" in explaining why more troops were needed in Afghanistan." Unfortunately for you, Jordan, Obama was right about that. http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/13/africa/taliban.php http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/feb/05/afghan-civilian-casualties-rising-analysts-report/ http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B02E2D91638F932A15754C0A9649C8B63 Regarding Obama's criticism of Iraq, he's right about that as well. The Iraq war WAS a catastrophe by any measure in spite of recent improvements, and those improvements, slow in coming, will enable a Democratic Administration under Obama to claim a successful resolution of Iraq (something that you're going to love, I'm sure). Even worse, with the proper refocus on Afghanistan/Pakistan (which Bush should never have abandoned in the first place), Obama will be able to claim a victory where Bush couldn't. Karma, baby. Karma.
Toggle Commented Jul 20, 2008 on Obama's fact finding at BlackFive
1 reply
Rich, Maliki sounds like Obama even more now, adding contingencies and modifying his earlier position. I'm surprised that no one has called Maliki a "flip-flopper" yet. LOL!
Toggle Commented Jul 20, 2008 on Obama's fact finding at BlackFive
1 reply
McMill1599: I'd say its style over style. I doubt that the majority of voters delve more than superficially into any of the issues. C-Bob, I've already made my bet with Tom W. Feel free to find another Democrat to make your bet with, though. There are lots of us.
Toggle Commented Jul 20, 2008 on Obama's fact finding at BlackFive
1 reply
MCMILL1599 - I think the polls reflect the continued splintering effect of the Hillary contingent, and I don't see that going away until after Denver, but I'm confident that after the Democratic convention, the margins will increase more and more. As regards flip-flops, this article in Salon http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/07/17/flip_flop/ pretty much says the same thing that I did earlier - both candidates have done it, and it's going to wind up being a wash in terms of its impact on the election. I particularly like the closing paragraph: "This election may prove to be the one in which the flip-flop, as political weapon, finally fizzles. Both Obama and McCain are trying to play up their commitment to changing the country's course. And it may be that as that course looks increasingly difficult, voters will pay the most attention to how the candidates are adapting to and planning to deal with the war or the economy, rather than punishing them for lacking George W. Bush's dogmatism."
Toggle Commented Jul 20, 2008 on Obama's fact finding at BlackFive
1 reply
For Tom and Jordan, please point to a single politician who has laid out a consistent platform in line with his or her voting record and remained true to each and every provision through the campaign and during their period in office. Just one will suffice. Since that's clearly an impossible task, and since McCain indulges in at least as many "modifications" of his position as Obama does, that criticism is a wash. The fact is that these are politicians, not philospher-kings. For better or for worse, we're governed by people in a profession that's on a par with used car salesmen and lawyers. So the choice isn't between someone who flip flops and someone who doesn't - they both do. It's not between a politician and a non-politician - they both are political animals. It's between a part of the Washington establishment (McCain) and a fresh voice that's new to Washington. TV ratings ought to have told you by now that the American people aren't real smart. More people vote for American Idol than in our Presidential elections. So it's really as simple as what I've just described (old versus new). Or to put it in the words of Will Smith's character in Men in Black II, pointing to McCain "Old and busted", pointing to Obama "New hotness".
Toggle Commented Jul 20, 2008 on Obama's fact finding at BlackFive
1 reply
The public doesn't want the same old politics, mcmill1599. That's the error in looking at Congress' approval ratings. It's Obama's lack of experience that makes him so attractive. As has been said many times before, "experience" brought us to where we are. "Judgment" is what was lacking, and judgment is what Obama can deliver. One remaining issue won't be decided until the Democratic convention and that's the Hilary contingent. There's a lot of anger out there that needs to get expressed. Once that happens at the convention, and we move into the Fall, I predict that you'll see a huge lead develop in the polls, and a record-setting landslide Obama victory in November. (f I'm wrong, I've already pledged a $100 donation to Soldiers Angels.
Toggle Commented Jul 19, 2008 on Obama's fact finding at BlackFive
1 reply
It's a bet, Tom. If Obama wins, you donate $100 to Soldiers Angels. If he loses, I'll happily do the same. Proof to be posted in the comments section of Blackfive.net at one of Uncle Jimbo's inevitable and probably numerous posts on the election results. And as to credibility. Wrong opinions expressed publicly go to a person's credibility, whether you like it or not. Need a definition of the word? How about "capable of being believed" or "worthy of belief". But don't worry about looking "stupid", Tom. The Soldiers Angels will be glad you did.
Toggle Commented Jul 19, 2008 on Obama's fact finding at BlackFive
1 reply
After reading all 15 pages, I'm not impressed with Amend's argument. He never establishes his first principle - Create a strategic narrative. Amend writes: "Such a narrative will be short, compelling, and culturally unassailable. It will explain the purpose of all government actions. It will be used to interpret events all the way down to the tactical level throughout a counterinsurgency. The narrative will appeal directly to the local population and, indirectly, reveal insurgents for what they are: e.g., ruthless, foreign, and lacking any credible plan or capability to improve the lives of local residents. This storyline will be the foundation for subsequent strategy, policy, and action." Unfortunately but not unexpectedly, he fails to do that anywhere in this paper. The paper fails on that point alone. Frankly, I'm more interested in reading "The Beginner's Guide to Nation-Building" by James Dobbins (available via Amazon for $23.10.) or you can get the RAND version for free here: http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG557/ From the abstract: "This guidebook is a practical “how-to” manual on the conduct of effective nation-building. It is organized around the constituent elements that make up any nation-building mission: military, police, rule of law, humanitarian relief, governance, economic stabilization, democratization, and development. The chapters describe how each of these components should be organized and employed, how much of each is likely to be needed, and the likely cost. The lessons are drawn principally from 16 U.S.- and UN-led nation-building operations since World War II and from a forthcoming study on European-led missions. In short, this guidebook presents a comprehensive history of best practices in nation-building and serves as an indispensable reference for the preplanning of future interventions and for contingency planning on the ground."
Toggle Commented Jul 19, 2008 on COIN for Diplomats at BlackFive
1 reply
Sorry, Jimbo, but your headline was "Israel announces ...". The gov't of Israel announced nothing of the sort.
Toggle Commented Jul 19, 2008 on Israel announces Winter bombing plans at BlackFive
1 reply