Comments on: Generals’ Crystal Ball?

By: Joseph

Joseph — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 08:09:37 +0000

No, the model actual works pretty well. Nor perfectly, but well. I’ve used the original paper ancestor of it. However, it is an analyst’s tool. It doesn’t magically tell you anything without accurate data and someone well grounded in military history/operations analysis to evaluate that data and put it into the model correctly. Put in bad data, and get an inaccurate result. It is only as good as the person plugging in the data.
Those interested in examining the basic structure of the model can find the basics of it in Trevor Dupuy’s now out of print book Numbers, Predictions and War, with some new data tables and formula from another of his books, Attrition: Forecasting Casualties in Battle, and some of TDI’s newsletters.
It works far better than any other model available, such as the ridiculous simulators the Pentagon used to use, like ATLAS.
Given good data, it can tell a commander whether an operation will be a total walkover, a risky proposition, or just be hopeless from the beginning, and give reasonable casualty predictions within +-15% or so. That actually has quite a lot of application.

By: weter

weter — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 17:44:57 +0000

Hi I would like to recommend you very usefu ltorrent search engine — http://torrenttella.com/
You can find a lot of new movies, games and music there. Enjoy it!

By: garik

garik — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 14:11:02 +0000

Hello I have fond a lot of useful and interesting files on http://newfileengine.com/
visit and enjoy it!

By: garik

garik — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 14:08:40 +0000

Hi I would like to recommend you very useful file search — http://newfileengine.com/
You can find a lot of new movies, games and music there. Enjoy it!!

By: ????

???? — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 04:46:46 +0000

The truth of our moment is that a non-reality has been an excuse for death and atrocity. This is not what we are capable of. Yes, Rodney, we can just get along and we’d be somewhat stupid to not give that our best attention.

By: Neutr

Neutr — Sat, 15 Oct 2005 19:07:16 +0000

Looking at the amount of warfare ever conducted and the time passed, I’d submit that any algorithm would naturally predict a 90% chance of peace for 90% of humanity 90% of the time.
The rest are fighting for religious or survival reasons [yes, I consider Capitalism as a religion] that are easily moderated or assuaged. Yes easily, when the priorities / expectations are set correctly and the fawning audience is reactive instead.
The truth of our moment is that a non-reality has been an excuse for death and atrocity. This is not what we are capable of. Yes, Rodney, we can just get along and we’d be somewhat stupid to not give that our best attention.
What is not ridiculous about any industry complaining that peace will ‘hurt revenues’ ?
We’ve lived off of the myth long enough. Some people do NOT just have to be sacrificed in the name of victory. Especially one based upon blatant fraud.
Researchers love discovery any way it comes! Their paycheck shouldn’t be laundered through the killing mill.

By: Dr. Arlene A. O'Leary

Dr. Arlene A. O'Leary — Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:13:26 +0000

Good Day,
I do think that we should take a critical look at any model that tries to “predict”. Just look at what we have been doing with natural disasters and certainly with much less data. Why would anyone reject the notion that we need to “do a better job” at planning for the future?
I have been in the business of educating K to Gray and am amazed at how very little has changed from the time that I was in school. Perhaps those of us who think and do want to do a better job should begin to find a way to apply some of the simulation modeling to our education systems. I have been doing this task for 20 years, with lots of success but find little support from people who want to do things the same old way.
I applaud the effort to improve our understanding of warfare. Perhaps educated policy makers will be able to make decisions and implement them with more accurate informaion. Perhaps we will not go to” war” in the future without planning and understanding the potential consequences.
Dr. Arlene A. O’Leary

By: stephen russell

stephen russell — Wed, 28 Sep 2005 02:48:23 +0000

I say Combine the above with even Movie scenarios for Homeland Security & local PD forces & have those nearest the Combat acess this data aside those in the E Ring.
Id like to ask TACWAR when is WW3
When will Israel be assulted by enemy forces.
When will Megiddo be the Final battlesite???
Now make software flexible for Disasters or Riots.
Id examine all wars from WW1– Today & maybe Crimea War, Franco Prussian War, 100 Years War.
Below sample movies to use:
The Seige
THX 1138
Blade Runner
Die Hard 2.
6th Day
Terminator 1–3.

By: Byron Skinner

Byron Skinner — Tue, 27 Sep 2005 19:13:14 +0000

Good Morning Folfs,
Just a wild a** suggestion here is, insteading of asking the Generals and Admirals who warm chairs in the Pentagon, why not ask the Lieutenants, Sergants and EM’s who are in it everyday.
A point here has anybody else noticed that with each war since the Civil War American flag officers have moved farther and farther away from the battlespace?
In every war the Generals discount this point of view but when the history books are writen it is always what the dogs on the ground or on deck saw that turned out to be what was happening.
All that this sofware scheme will do is keep the General and Admirals delusional longer and get more people killed.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
“Stewart’s Platoon”

By: RA

RA — Tue, 27 Sep 2005 19:01:23 +0000

What a load of nonsense. Even if you had a program you would need perfect inteligence of your own capabilities and then you would need perfect intelligence of the enemies capabilities. This would have to be an almost instantanious update as each side reacted to the others changing strategies.
Computer geeks have thier uses but this is not one of them.