Pentagon moving to increase US troop numbers in Iraq soon

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Pentagon said Friday it was moving to increase the number of American forces in Iraq and announced that U.S. forces have killed the Islamic State’s finance minister. “We are systematically eliminating ISIL’s cabinet,” Defense Secretary Ash Carter said.

I think Trump will have a mandate to make those in the Arab world take care of their own, or pay us to do it for you. I wonder if Trump knows how quickly relationships can change? I mean he had to maintain his image to keep people coming back to his buildings with his name on it. Is he going to keep that image, or become a leader.

In other words, is Trump going to put his name on this country or not? Would a leader?

Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said recommendations on ways to increase U.S. support for Iraq’s ground fight against IS are going to be discussed with President Barack Obama soon.

So muster up some cash Congress, if you got some kind of war to fight, or not. But let’s face it, this election might be the most important one you let happen–you need to commit yourself to something more than throw Obama out of the WH.

The Constitution has done that part for you, so who are you fighting? Not a big fan of the Constitution, eh?

“The secretary and I both believe that there will be an increase in U.S. forces in Iraq in coming weeks, but that decision hasn’t been made,” Dunford told Pentagon reporters during a briefing. He did not say how big that increase might be.

Yes Republicans, Obama hasn’t made that decision yet. Do you want Trump to do it? The answer maybe something voters need to listen to before the Middle East explodes, and not after, when it is out of our control.

One may say that we never had control in the first place. The difference between Shia and Sunni Arabs have been deemed unsolvable according to Islam, and, from what I have heard, climate change is taking away their water, neither which the Republican’s base believe we have control of.

I am just not sure Trump is saying that. That is the problem when living inside a bubble.

Source: Pentagon moving to increase US troop numbers in Iraq soon – Yahoo News

Ft.^4=G; Mystery Solved

Statics is the center of gravity around which any course in engineering is created. It was in my statics class that I was first introduced to the units of measure feet to the fourth power. This is the units for a moment of inertia. But what does it look like?

This was the question I asked my instructor. What does ft^4 look like? I mean in my life, which at the time was going on 50 years, I was able to  see in my mind what ft.^2 (area) looks like. I also could “see” what ft.^3 (volume) looks like, but ft^4 was a mystery to me. So I asked my instructor.

He couldn’t help me. I told him that it must be similar to a sphere, and settled on a sphere at a radius as my mental image of ft^4. I don’t know how helpful it was to have this picture, but I ended up receiving an A- in the class, which I was real satisfied with.

But really, if you are able to hold a mental image of gravity, gravity has the units of measure ft^4. If you can’t hold that image, gravity is probably unitless.

Maybe if my statics class had been calculus based I would have come to this image as gravity sooner, as calculus, I was told, enables you to understand infinity better, which seems to me would have made the understanding of gravity better, but I am not sure.

I haven’t worked out the math for gravity yet, but then math was never my greatest advantage, in engineering class. I understood math, but I had the same ability in the maneuvering of numbers as I did in maneuvering letters for spelling, poor.

That said, gravity is basically acceleration at zero velocity, which, unlike acceleration where at zero velocity there is a change in time but not distance, in gravity there is a change in distance, but no change in time. The units of measure for acceleration is second^2 and the units for gravity is ft^4. I suppose ft^4 is a quantum.

Time is a position, as is space a distance (or a bunch of distances). That is why the speed of light is a constant. Once you reach the speed of light, you have positioned yourself in the same position as all time in all the moments in 3 dimensions. The only thing left in the fourth dimension is the change in distance, and that change is the same in all our solar system and beyond. So, upon reaching the speed of light, acceleration becomes constant, but velocity stops, and what you have left is ft^4 power.

As gravity is energy and not force, I guess I can start by writing: E=ft^4, which has zero meaning to me and probably everyone else. You got a moment? 🙂

 

Ranchers who inspired Oregon occupation report to prison – Yahoo News

But others said from a tactical standpoint, the government’s cautious response would make sense no matter who was holed up in the government building in the reserve.

That is not true. If it was Occupy Wallstreet occupying the government building, they would have won the first round against corporate America.

As it was: the strategy of the militia was such that the fact the ranchers reported to prison made the militia’s strategy one of loosing, instead of winning.

The Militia is against the government of the USA, but pro-corporate America.

Oregon and the local ranchers won this round.

Source: Ranchers who inspired Oregon occupation report to prison – Yahoo News

Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds (the mahdi’s arrival)

The greatest thing about a fiction narrative is that truth can be told without a lot of facts running around and distracting us. So in the movie “Lucy” and when actor Morgan Freeman tells us there are only two outcomes for the OODA loop of a cell,  because it is fiction, we can take those facts presented in the fictional movie as truths and run with it.

I already fictionalized what he said by asking you to think of the cell’s life as an OODA loop. If you don’t know what an OODA loop is, then you might as well move on or Google, because I’m not going to get into that discussion here. What I will say is that it sounds to me like cancer starts when, like Lucy, when one cell in your body gives up. There are two option at the end of every OODA loop. Option 1: a human cell becomes immortal and is called a cancer and becomes immortal or Option 2: dying and letting the next generation takeover.

In other words, for a human battling cancer and in a moment of time for one of their cells at the center of its environment, the cell sees no future for other generations of its kind and position. Within the confines of the cells position it becomes immortal and is called cancer. Through the consequences of this decision, the cell’s loop is literally broken by the magnitude of the inertia of that decision and the outcome of this revelation (through the cell’s decision process) and the cell stops evolving and the cell becomes cancer.

A friend of ours, who we have loved since she was 3-years-old, recently died of brain-cancer. I have a hard time believing there was any cell in her body that had given-up, but I have no clue as to what the environment was like when the cell did give-up.

I have said once that cellphones are the cigarettes of her generation, and she loved the cell phone, and selfies, and Facebook, and all that connecting they represent. In a word, she lived inside her connected generation, so it is hard to blame either her or her cellphone. She basically ended her last 60 days of life expressing herself with the one finger that could still move, and thanking the doctors who kept cutting on her brain (de-massing) down to the last finger. So she was not a quitter in any sense of the word.

But just because one cell might have given-up, it doesn’t mean we should overlook the objects and those connections that might have produced such a toxic environment and made a cell simply give up on evolution and go immortal.

What it does mean is that we have to observe the narrative from a distance and the magnitude of the narrative is by distance square. In other words, that distance our friend had to travel in battling cancer is very hard to remember, because, I, for one, think about that little girl everyday, and remaining positive is still good medicine.

Still,  that movie did produce a powerful image as the “mahdi” Lucy sees no future and becomes immortal. What’s that mean? Is the mahdi a form of cancer, or vice versa?

First Drucker Now Gamers?

Twitter / @larrydunbar/ooda.

I have read some of the report Michael Gerald Moore is outlining in his tweets here. It could be that Japan has found a way to harness the power (OODA loop) of the Next Generation Gamers.

Gamers are deep rooted experts that have little culture, but know how to tear down structure until it’s theirs. Gamers are good a learning the rules of the game and taking advantage of the rules to the dis-advantage of the designer of the game, until they own the game more than the designer.

In this case, it is the customer’s game, and corporate culture be damned, and the gamers play to win.

I could be wrong, but I think managers at Toyota are giving these people (Gamers) time to learn the rules, before crossing the gap between Decision and Action. Perhaps in another way, Toyota is py-passing orientation and pouncing between Observation and Decision, because Orientation is where much of the culture forms.

These Gamers would not be as suseptiable to integration of Toyota’s corporate culture and freer of bias, but they would eventually “own” the game.

I think there is more going on here, or I should say there at Toyota, but I have been wrong before, at least not mostly right.

Of course if I am mostly right, this could mean a big break for Japan, and a possible bounce back to number two, depending on if and where they are going with the meme.

I Tied My Shoes Today

The title of this post should say that I tied my shoes correctly today. Shoes that are tied correctly not only look good, but resist failure. Failure,in this context, means the the shoe no longer fits snug on the foot and the laces can become tripping hazards if they become untied (the knot fails).

Shoes that are tied correctly look good, because the bow, created by the knot, stays in-line with the shoe openings from both sides of the shoe laces. Shoes that are not tied correctly look less apealing, because the bow turns perpendicular to the shoe laces.

Yesterday, I watched a TED video in which a very smart guy explained that perpendicular forces do knot (sorry about the pun) remain as “tight” when they are aligned perpendicular to each other, as they would, if all the forces in the system were aligned in the same direction, attractive and repulsive.

After watching the video, I had to wonder if any testing has been done that tells us if a shoe that “looks good” has a knot which is more resilient than a shoe whose looks are less than to be desired. Resilience in this context means the knot can “fail”, but the knot that is most resilient resists breakage of the laces when tied.

As societies are created with perpendicular forces to their culture, because of the tempo they function at, perhaps a society that is structured to look like the less desirable knot has an advantage of greater resilience.

Let’s say we are looking at a bow-tie, with the Do’ers in the center and the rich and poor class fanning-out in both directions, along the liminal narrative of the decision making of the society.

It would appear that you would want this society aligned as the knot that looks good, i.e. aligned with “time” (“time” being the shoe laces) goes. But forces aligned that “looks good” might not always be the most resilient. It could be that the “slippage” you are experiencing with shoe laces that are aligned perpendicular with the knot is the resilience of the society.

If the “slippage” is the resilience, (and maybe it’s not), I don’t care if the knot slips or not, I always double-knot my shoelaces, to keep them tight, unless the dog has chewed the laces into halves (and perhaps halves knots).

4GW

John Robb was talking the other day, and Zenpundit  later expanded, about how to enter into another’s OODA loop. I suggested one way of positioning inside another’s loop, but I have thought of another. You can enter into another’s OODA loop through flux. Flux is when your position is within another’s, in such a way that the image of Ying/Yang is displayed. It can be said that you are in the position of Ying/Yang with another. This is an insurgency (incumbent/insurgency) position called Fourth Generational Warfare (4GW).

Call it what you want, Fourth Generational Warfare or a Fourth Generational World, this is a civil war, as we become connected, because of Globalization in Communication, like never before.

Well, maybe not unlike before. There could have been 3 more or less other cycles, so this could be the twelfth or thirteen, but who knows? In fact, this 4GW stuff is probably what happens when the world historically becomes connect on a globe scale. Maybe in a Rome-Countrymen-lend-me-your-ear type connection.

The problem is that there is no 5GW to go forward towards a future worth living. Of course there actually is 5GW, but it is without ethics, and it is ethics that a movement like Ying/Yang is structurally built out of. Therefore, a 5GW world is a world without structure and without structure a thing doesn’t exist.

What’s so terrifying about 4GW is that neither the incumbent nor the insurgency has an advantage over the other; they simply move one country, or another, this way or that. They are perpendicular forces (Ying over yang is the exponent that defines the structure of the insurgency) that just steer the movement one way or the other. Think General Sherman here, as he marched across the South in a most un-American maneuver. At least un-American for, at the time,  an American North and South.

But I would say we have choices:

  • We could continue to build a middle class, so the 1% incumbent force doesn’t over-power the 99%.
  • We could go back to 1GW, which is happening on our southern border.
  • We could go back to 2GW, which is happening on our northern border.
  • We could continually engage in 3GW, as the US has been in Iraq and Afghanistan, to mention just a few.
  • Or we could just continue to be terrified, as a war without ethics approaches.

It should be noted that the problem isn’t that the ethics of the American middle class has changed, as Paul Krugman’s graph shows us it hasn’t. If the ethic of the 99% had been the one changing so much, then there would have been big spikes in the addition/  subtraction of resources. The problem is that the ethics of the 1% is in constant change, as they “get religion” through the regulation of the market place, or lose their faith in the square.