[SG2/DS] Intel

From: "John Atkinson" <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com>

> That's the funny thing. They've got a lot of really

Much as I disagree with a lot of their conclusions.... Gathering data is
relatively easy. Analysing it is the
hard part. Taking 2+2 and making 5.

My own experience has been limited to semi-commercial
military analysis. Basically, given a whole heap of unclassified data on
possible opponents, decide what equipment is required to beat them, so we can
then make said equipment.

Our proposal is then submitted (along with competing proposals) to the *real*
analysts, who have access to data we don't have.

This process involves a LOT of talking to serving and
ex-serving military personnel. Otherwise it's far too
easy to make something the Engineers and Scientists will love, but will fall
apart at the seams in combat.

What I'm trying to say is that military anlysis is hard: it's an art, not a
science, with a lot of heuristics ( ie guesswork and hunches). The people who
are good at it can't always, or even usually, give a
closely-reasoned analysis of why they came to the

--- Alan and Carmel Brain <aebrain@webone.com.au>
wrote:
> From: "John Atkinson" <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com>

> > Ivory tower idealists, actually.

Sticking it where Joe Public can get ahold of it in an accessible form is
apparently not.:)

> conclusions: it would sap confidence. Whereas the

Heh.

:)

I'm so not going to comment on this further than to say that my Old Man was
one of those weenies for almost 3 decades.:)

On Thu, 11 Jul 2002 15:15:57 +1000 "Alan and Carmel Brain"
> <aebrain@webone.com.au> writes:

At the risk of "me too" - Hallelujah, Amen!"

Gracias,

> Whereas the Intel

And sometimes they die because they did say what the best guess was, and it
wasn't right either.

Alas, too true.

Like medicine, Intel is still a 'practice'...

On Fri, 12 Jul 2002 07:47:37 -0400 "Imre A. Szabo" <ias@sprintmail.com>
writes:
> Whereas the Intel