7 ms·

Additional detail: The author was one of the architects for major pieces of the Iraq war, including the surge. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meghan_O%27Sulliva

by voz_ 6y ago

Additional detail: The author was one of the architects for major pieces of the Iraq war, including the surge. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meghan_O%27Sullivan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meghan_O%27Sullivan

JackFr 6y ago
What is your point?
- matthewaveryusa 6y ago
  You know the expression let the chips fall where they may? Well this is just stating "here are the chips." i.e the author is knowledgeable in the field and either is offering expert opinion or expert manipulation.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - ImaCake 6y ago
    Not sure why you are being modded. A third option, which I consider most likely, is that this piece is doing both. The author most likely believes in what they are saying and are trying to manipulate things in a certain direction. There is noting wrong with this, and I think understanding the bias is merely a more effective way to gain more from reading this.
    - matthewaveryusa 6y ago
      no idea what modded means. That's a fair point. so you're saying that maybe the author doesn't know they are being manipulated despite being an expert -- that's also possible!
      - ImaCake 6y ago
        > the author doesn't know they are being manipulated despite being an expert Actually I meant the author was aware of his view and is being both manipulative while fairly forwarding his agenda. Your option would be a fourth possibility? Which would make sense since any two binary outcomes will give a 2x2 sample space for a total of 4 outcomes.
- Pfhreak 6y ago
  It's useful to understand the biases of an author when reading an article. We all have them, and no media is free from them. It contextualizes a piece, and it's information I found useful to my understanding of the piece.
  - swimfar 6y ago
    I agree, but at the same time, it could also introduce a bias and prejudice into your perception of the article. This would be especially true if you already had strong feelings and opinions about the author. Maybe the ideal way would be to read it without any knowledge of the author. And then go back and reread it after knowing who wrote it.
    - 0xddd 6y ago
      And what better way to find out who wrote it than to scan the comments after reading the article? In all seriousness, I don't see how wilful ignorance on the first-read through is some ideal analytic strategy.
      - 1MachineElf 6y ago
        Not knowing who the author is is actually a component of an ideal analytic strategy. Same principle behind why double-blind tests have high efficacy.
        Pfhreak 6y ago
        Reading an article is different than a double blind test. Reputation exists because it is critical shorthand when dealing with other humans. It's not always right. It's not always useful. But it shortcuts a lot of preamble. Also, most geopolitical problems aren't simple analytical problems. There isn't a 'right answer' that one can divine by approaching the space with an emotionless evaluation.
        redisman 6y ago
balladeer 6y ago
> endured some harrowing experiences while in Iraq, including escaping from a terrorist attack by scaling a building ledge ten stories up This is fascinating :) https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/02/AR2007040201745.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/0...
- dntbnmpls 6y ago
  As fascinating as hillary, brian williams, jessica lynch, pat tillman, etc war time fiction peddled by the media. Pretty much every nonsense you read in the papers during war is bound to be a lie or highly exaggerated. The first casualty of war is the truth after all. Last I checked we've been in a neverending period of war.
  - nominated1 6y ago
    Please expand on Pat Tillman. He does not belong on that list. This is the same man that as soon as the war moved from Afghanistan to Iraq was quoted as saying “this war is so fucking illegal.” Full disclouse: I knew him personally… mostly from a distance. It was disgusting seeing the likes of Senator John McCain try to capitalize on his death. That doesn’t mean he wasn’t the man depicted in Jon Krakauers’ book.
    - dntbnmpls 6y ago
      You are misunderstanding my point. My issue isn't with the individuals, my issue was with the war time "stories" made up by the military/news. Pat Tillman was killed in friendly fire. But the story we got initially was that he was killed by the enemy. "Lieutenant General Stanley McChrystal approved the Silver Star citation on April 28, 2004, which gave a detailed account of Tillman's death including the phrase "in the line of devastating enemy fire," but the next day he sent a P4 confidential memo warning senior government members that Tillman might actually have been killed by friendly fire" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Tillman#Surrounding_Tillman's_death https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Tillman#Surrounding_Tillma... Certainly Tillman didn't spread the lies. Jessica Lynch didn't spread the lies either. It was the military/news/etc. Hence : The first casualty of war is the truth. > Full disclouse: I knew him personally… mostly from a distance. Yeah, I knew him "personally" too like millions of other football fans.
person_of_color 6y ago
Interesting. So why is this person not shunned from her industry for being partly responsible for a geopolitical disaster? It's akin to taking business advice from Ken Lay and Jeffrey Skilling.
- shkkmo 6y ago
  You seem to be not distinguishing between the effort to start that war and the effort to manage and end it. Specifically, Rumsfield's opposition to her involvement would seem to speak well of her in that regard.
- lesdeuxmagots 6y ago
  Jeff Skilling could probably give some real fantastic advice on business and finance, particularly structured products, operating, etc. That's not to say you'd want to FOLLOW the advice, but it would likely increase your knowledge or insight into something. His failure was in ethics. THAT might be something you'd not want to look towards him for. It's very useful to separate the two. In this instance, an expert's read on a situation is interesting and informative. You just might not want to take his policy recommendation.
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    The problem is that motivated experts, especially unethical ones, generally feel no compunction about analyzing things in ways biased towards their recommendations. Jeff Skilling would surely describe some frauds to you as just a normal, slightly complicated structured product.
- njharman 6y ago
  Their "Industry" is selling political agenda and influencing governments for corporate benefit. Seems successful. > geopolitical disaster "disasters" are profitable (for those able to benefit from corruption). And enable western/democratic governments to get away with violating their citizens. PATRIOT Act for instance. Read 1984 for background of how "fear of attack" and "security" is used to keep the masses in line.
xxpor 6y ago
Between the Kennedy School and the law school, it seems like everyone I hear about coming out of Harvard these days is stupid and/or evil in some profound way.
- Nasrudith 6y ago
  That seems to be a common disease of old money institutions - caring about self perpetuating themselves with illusion of merit instead who is actually the best fit for the job. See the goalposts on rails of the Ivy League to try to keep out "model minorities" like their physicals, analogies specifically designed to not be in the high school literature canon but among New England old money, the extraciruculars requirements, and more. The game is all about blending the wheat and their chaff.
  - coffeemug 6y ago
    EDIT: THE FOLLOWING DATA IS WRONG. (I foolishly misread a chart. Leaving this up for continuity, but the numbers are completely off.) --- Less than a third of Harvard students come from a household with income greater than $100,000/year. Almost half the students come from households with income between $30,000 and $75,000/year. One in six students comes from a poor family. Harvard is firmly middle class. The data simply doesn’t support the argument that Harvard admissions is some old money New England conspiracy.
    - Sebguer 6y ago
      And way more than 1/6th of America is part of a 'poor family'. Old money is vastly over-represented in Harvard, and even more vastly over-represented in the backbone of the institution.
      - coffeemug 6y ago
        EDIT: THE FOLLOWING DATA IS WRONG. (I foolishly misread a chart. Leaving this up for continuity, but the numbers are completely off.) --- No. Only 25% of households in the US have annual income between $35,000 and $75,000. About one in five families in the US is below the poverty line. So middle class students are over represented at Harvard. Students from poor families are only slightly underrepresented, and considering that household income and academic achievement are correlated, it’s actually a testament to their efforts to have socially conscious admissions. The facts do not support your argument. On this you are simply wrong.
Iv 6y ago
To me the most relevant part was this: > She was an assistant to Paul Bremer in the Coalition Provisional Authority. She was Senior Director for Iraq at the United States National Security Council. Around that time, Bremer decided to bar former ba'ath officer from either serving the new military or getting pension. That decision almost single-handedly created the backbone of the terrorist networks that would become ISIS. People from that admin should be shunned from any published analysis but failing that, I am happy that forums like this allows us to augment their biographies. On the other hand, I have yet to see a Bloomberg article not about finance that was not misinformed. Those about tech especially are pretty bad, and every time I dug a bit around their geopolitical analysis, I was pretty underwhelmed.
- jeffdavis 6y ago
  "People from that admin should be shunned from any published analysis" Interestingly, it was GWB that also put a lot of effort into pandemic preparedness. See: https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/homeland/pandemic-influenza.html https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/homeland/pandemi... History is kind of a weird place.
  - dantheman 6y ago
    GWB is war monger and torturer. Sure he may have done some things that are good, but he made many horrible decisions.
    - divbzero 6y ago
      Among the good things, George W. Bush contributed more to the fight against HIV/AIDS than any other president. [1] [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President%27s_Emergency_Plan_for_AIDS_Relief https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President%27s_Emergency_Plan_f...
      - boomboomsubban 6y ago
        I can't find the full funding breakdown, but I'd guess Obama contributed more. Purely as he had 8 years to Bush's 5 though.
voldacar 6y ago
>She is Jeane Kirkpatrick Professor of the Practice of International Affairs at Harvard Kennedy School and a board member of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Kennedy School.[2] She is a member of the board of directors of the Council on Foreign Relations,[3] where she was previously an adjunct senior fellow, and the North American chair of the Trilateral Commission.[4] Damn, checks all the boxes
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

by voz_ 6y ago

JackFr 6y ago

What is your point?

matthewaveryusa 6y ago
You know the expression let the chips fall where they may? Well this is just stating "here are the chips." i.e the author is knowledgeable in the field and either is offering expert opinion or expert manipulation.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- ImaCake 6y ago
  Not sure why you are being modded. A third option, which I consider most likely, is that this piece is doing both. The author most likely believes in what they are saying and are trying to manipulate things in a certain direction. There is noting wrong with this, and I think understanding the bias is merely a more effective way to gain more from reading this.
  - matthewaveryusa 6y ago
    no idea what modded means. That's a fair point. so you're saying that maybe the author doesn't know they are being manipulated despite being an expert -- that's also possible!
    - ImaCake 6y ago
      > the author doesn't know they are being manipulated despite being an expert Actually I meant the author was aware of his view and is being both manipulative while fairly forwarding his agenda. Your option would be a fourth possibility? Which would make sense since any two binary outcomes will give a 2x2 sample space for a total of 4 outcomes.
Pfhreak 6y ago
It's useful to understand the biases of an author when reading an article. We all have them, and no media is free from them. It contextualizes a piece, and it's information I found useful to my understanding of the piece.
- swimfar 6y ago
  I agree, but at the same time, it could also introduce a bias and prejudice into your perception of the article. This would be especially true if you already had strong feelings and opinions about the author. Maybe the ideal way would be to read it without any knowledge of the author. And then go back and reread it after knowing who wrote it.
  - 0xddd 6y ago
    And what better way to find out who wrote it than to scan the comments after reading the article? In all seriousness, I don't see how wilful ignorance on the first-read through is some ideal analytic strategy.
    - 1MachineElf 6y ago
      Not knowing who the author is is actually a component of an ideal analytic strategy. Same principle behind why double-blind tests have high efficacy.
      - Pfhreak 6y ago
        Reading an article is different than a double blind test. Reputation exists because it is critical shorthand when dealing with other humans. It's not always right. It's not always useful. But it shortcuts a lot of preamble. Also, most geopolitical problems aren't simple analytical problems. There isn't a 'right answer' that one can divine by approaching the space with an emotionless evaluation.
        redisman 6y ago

balladeer 6y ago

> endured some harrowing experiences while in Iraq, including escaping from a terrorist attack by scaling a building ledge ten stories up This is fascinating :) https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/02/AR2007040201745.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/0...

dntbnmpls 6y ago
As fascinating as hillary, brian williams, jessica lynch, pat tillman, etc war time fiction peddled by the media. Pretty much every nonsense you read in the papers during war is bound to be a lie or highly exaggerated. The first casualty of war is the truth after all. Last I checked we've been in a neverending period of war.
- nominated1 6y ago
  Please expand on Pat Tillman. He does not belong on that list. This is the same man that as soon as the war moved from Afghanistan to Iraq was quoted as saying “this war is so fucking illegal.” Full disclouse: I knew him personally… mostly from a distance. It was disgusting seeing the likes of Senator John McCain try to capitalize on his death. That doesn’t mean he wasn’t the man depicted in Jon Krakauers’ book.
  - dntbnmpls 6y ago
    You are misunderstanding my point. My issue isn't with the individuals, my issue was with the war time "stories" made up by the military/news. Pat Tillman was killed in friendly fire. But the story we got initially was that he was killed by the enemy. "Lieutenant General Stanley McChrystal approved the Silver Star citation on April 28, 2004, which gave a detailed account of Tillman's death including the phrase "in the line of devastating enemy fire," but the next day he sent a P4 confidential memo warning senior government members that Tillman might actually have been killed by friendly fire" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Tillman#Surrounding_Tillman's_death https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Tillman#Surrounding_Tillma... Certainly Tillman didn't spread the lies. Jessica Lynch didn't spread the lies either. It was the military/news/etc. Hence : The first casualty of war is the truth. > Full disclouse: I knew him personally… mostly from a distance. Yeah, I knew him "personally" too like millions of other football fans.

person_of_color 6y ago

Interesting. So why is this person not shunned from her industry for being partly responsible for a geopolitical disaster? It's akin to taking business advice from Ken Lay and Jeffrey Skilling.

shkkmo 6y ago
You seem to be not distinguishing between the effort to start that war and the effort to manage and end it. Specifically, Rumsfield's opposition to her involvement would seem to speak well of her in that regard.
lesdeuxmagots 6y ago
Jeff Skilling could probably give some real fantastic advice on business and finance, particularly structured products, operating, etc. That's not to say you'd want to FOLLOW the advice, but it would likely increase your knowledge or insight into something. His failure was in ethics. THAT might be something you'd not want to look towards him for. It's very useful to separate the two. In this instance, an expert's read on a situation is interesting and informative. You just might not want to take his policy recommendation.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  The problem is that motivated experts, especially unethical ones, generally feel no compunction about analyzing things in ways biased towards their recommendations. Jeff Skilling would surely describe some frauds to you as just a normal, slightly complicated structured product.
njharman 6y ago
Their "Industry" is selling political agenda and influencing governments for corporate benefit. Seems successful. > geopolitical disaster "disasters" are profitable (for those able to benefit from corruption). And enable western/democratic governments to get away with violating their citizens. PATRIOT Act for instance. Read 1984 for background of how "fear of attack" and "security" is used to keep the masses in line.

xxpor 6y ago

Between the Kennedy School and the law school, it seems like everyone I hear about coming out of Harvard these days is stupid and/or evil in some profound way.

Nasrudith 6y ago
That seems to be a common disease of old money institutions - caring about self perpetuating themselves with illusion of merit instead who is actually the best fit for the job. See the goalposts on rails of the Ivy League to try to keep out "model minorities" like their physicals, analogies specifically designed to not be in the high school literature canon but among New England old money, the extraciruculars requirements, and more. The game is all about blending the wheat and their chaff.
- coffeemug 6y ago
  EDIT: THE FOLLOWING DATA IS WRONG. (I foolishly misread a chart. Leaving this up for continuity, but the numbers are completely off.) --- Less than a third of Harvard students come from a household with income greater than $100,000/year. Almost half the students come from households with income between $30,000 and $75,000/year. One in six students comes from a poor family. Harvard is firmly middle class. The data simply doesn’t support the argument that Harvard admissions is some old money New England conspiracy.
  - Sebguer 6y ago
    And way more than 1/6th of America is part of a 'poor family'. Old money is vastly over-represented in Harvard, and even more vastly over-represented in the backbone of the institution.
    - coffeemug 6y ago
      EDIT: THE FOLLOWING DATA IS WRONG. (I foolishly misread a chart. Leaving this up for continuity, but the numbers are completely off.) --- No. Only 25% of households in the US have annual income between $35,000 and $75,000. About one in five families in the US is below the poverty line. So middle class students are over represented at Harvard. Students from poor families are only slightly underrepresented, and considering that household income and academic achievement are correlated, it’s actually a testament to their efforts to have socially conscious admissions. The facts do not support your argument. On this you are simply wrong.

Iv 6y ago

To me the most relevant part was this: > She was an assistant to Paul Bremer in the Coalition Provisional Authority. She was Senior Director for Iraq at the United States National Security Council. Around that time, Bremer decided to bar former ba'ath officer from either serving the new military or getting pension. That decision almost single-handedly created the backbone of the terrorist networks that would become ISIS. People from that admin should be shunned from any published analysis but failing that, I am happy that forums like this allows us to augment their biographies. On the other hand, I have yet to see a Bloomberg article not about finance that was not misinformed. Those about tech especially are pretty bad, and every time I dug a bit around their geopolitical analysis, I was pretty underwhelmed.

jeffdavis 6y ago
"People from that admin should be shunned from any published analysis" Interestingly, it was GWB that also put a lot of effort into pandemic preparedness. See: https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/homeland/pandemic-influenza.html https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/homeland/pandemi... History is kind of a weird place.
- dantheman 6y ago
  GWB is war monger and torturer. Sure he may have done some things that are good, but he made many horrible decisions.
  - divbzero 6y ago
    Among the good things, George W. Bush contributed more to the fight against HIV/AIDS than any other president. [1] [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President%27s_Emergency_Plan_for_AIDS_Relief https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President%27s_Emergency_Plan_f...
    - boomboomsubban 6y ago
      I can't find the full funding breakdown, but I'd guess Obama contributed more. Purely as he had 8 years to Bush's 5 though.

voldacar 6y ago

>She is Jeane Kirkpatrick Professor of the Practice of International Affairs at Harvard Kennedy School and a board member of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Kennedy School.[2] She is a member of the board of directors of the Council on Foreign Relations,[3] where she was previously an adjunct senior fellow, and the North American chair of the Trilateral Commission.[4] Damn, checks all the boxes

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]