(3) That involves knowing history. Knowing details of past incidents. Doing the hard work to identify patterns. I’ve either led or contributed to all the studies that have done that, so I can speak to the lessons that are there for the investigation team if they sought them.
-
-
That is SUCH an excellent framework, Larry. I'd argue for a separate/additional schematic that takes apart "misperception" farther, based on a review of data on how the "INTs"—both cultural factors like behavior/appearance & what you call "signature"—are understood/used in 1/
-
threat analysis. DoD never had the cultural/behavioral knowledge of Afghanistan that they should've; & in the years after the USSR fell apart, much of the IC (esp the service intel analysts) got a lot worse at understanding intel source validity & analysis, & at conveying 2/
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
@LarryLewis_ this entire thread is excellent but I am particularly impressed with this diagram as a potential tool for professional education. Is it part of a publication you could link to? -
He just developed it and posted it to Twitter
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
Hey Karen, this conversation is ready and compiled. Be sure to mention us from the last tweet to compile conversations. You can read it here:https://threader.app/conversation/1440092999824785412/AOUlplL3iN …
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.