White2Golf

When I think about this, I always end up wondering how they get AI to process "The Commanders Intent"?  It is not always "occupy space x".  I'm just a Sergeant, but for me that was the most important part of an order.   Just love your insights, sir.

Trust a Sgt to cut to the chase.
So Conative Models is what we are talking about here aka Human Will.  Based on all the effort and study into the fields of Marketing and Advertising the answer is definitely not "zero".  Two side to this 1) understanding and shaping an opponents Conative framework, and 2) predicting how well your own will actually do on the battlefield.  This winds up being another layer in the model overtop Cognitive and then all the physical layers...so complex.
As to #1, I think we are a lot further along than we give credit.  We have seen all sorts of big data groups being able to determine both collective and individual intent with very high levels of accuracy in everything from social media trends, spending/what they will buy, and who they will date.  Applying those advanced models to a military collective is not really that far fetched, what is hard is getting all the data all those people are giving off.  We have OPSEC and all that good stuff but we give off data like skin cells in the modern age [I heard one expert say that a switched on opponent could tell whether or not we were likely planning an offensive by looking at our waste water.  Troops would bulk up on Red Bull and that crap before a major outing].  Pulling all that data in and applying it to a predictive conative model is really not too far out there.
As to #2, well same principles but a lot trickier.  How do you measure the effect of a Comds intent on an organization?  It changes for every organization, Comd and timeframe.  I would imagine it becomes a "pressure factor" in the model that will need to be continual monitored and refreshed to be honest.  But how well intent is translated among human beings is the question here, driving how well we will likely behave in a manner that supports it.
As to how one pulls that into a full up predictive analytics model, well I would not be on a government salary if I knew that one to be honest...such a misspent youth.   Obviously the Conative framework would have to run up against Perception/Cognition as the two constantly interact.  In reality I think plumbing some learning models may yield significant fruit as this sort of thing happens a lot in that environment.  And then there is the physical predictive analytics layer, which is enormous and also filled with a lot of random effects.
My best guess is any effective model would be a bit like meteorology, very accurate in the short term and less accurate the further out one goes. Then we get into a competition to see whose model can stretch further out in time, and we are basically in a form of temporal competition.  This comes complete with c-measures and c-c-measures, which all make sense.  
So can AI/ML/whatever, understand and compute human context?  Well the answer really is a solid "maybe".  As was mentioned economic systems have not cracked it yet but I actually suspect they are much more complex than warfare.

The other important point is that modelling in general (thinking in terms of scientific modelling as a whole, rather than anything military specific) is often not about "predicting the future" in the sense that most people think of it. More often, i is about seeing how outcomes change with changing assumptions and input conditions.
You might find that parameter A barely matters at all - you can change it by a factor of 10 and it makes 1% difference to the outcome. So for parameter  A, don't waste too much time trying to evaluate it precisely. While parameter B might have a large effect on the outcome for relatively small changes, which means that your prediction is only as good as your ability to measure B accurately (and tells you that you need to know all of its interactions very precisely). 
So often it isn't about predicting the future, it is about determining which the critical parameters are in your model, and what information you therefore need to be able to find out in order to make any kind of relevant prediction at all. It is about identifying the critical factors and understanding how they interact with each other.
We've all seen factors in this war that probably wasn't in many military models before, or were only just starting to be appreciated. The willingness of Russian troops to abandon important equipment. The ability of light infantry with modern ATGMs to be able to hit high value targets. The use of drones in reconnaisance, fire control and as weapon systems. Crowd-sourcing intelligence from a friendly population. Modelling can (hopefully) be used to figure out how important each of these are and how they interact with each other.

When I think about this, I always end up wondering how they get AI to process "The Commanders Intent"?  It is not always "occupy space x".  I'm just a Sergeant, but for me that was the most important part of an order.   Just love your insights, sir.

Well you hit on a pretty important point here and one modern militaries are all watching out for...what happens when we can?
Some argue that war is too chaotic and non-linear to ever be able to create effective models that provide predictive analytics; we do it now with a collection of human brains called staff, and as we see in the current example they can fail too.
Others argue that war is "chaoplexic" and not truly fully chaotic because it is bounded by some hard rulesets and frameworks (e.g. physics) and as such the irrationality of human beings can also be smoothed out or at least made more predictable (e.g. Cambridge Analytica and Big Data stuff). 
Most of us in the business don't really know but we sure are interested if that second one turns out to be true.  Why?  Because the first side to take AI/Machine Learning/Quantum Computing and use it to create effective predictive analytical models that stand up, has an enormous advantage on the battlefield.  The peace-nicks are all on about "kill bots" but this application of technology to warfare in predictive modeling has frightening implications that really give weight to the ideas of "cognitive superiority" as a applicable and measurable concept.
Lotta skeptics wave it away as "never going to happen", which it might not.  Then again there were a lot of skeptics on powered flight as well, and mechanized, and PGM, and smart weapons and cyber...so there is that.     

So in the ol Capt's personal definition of war: a collision of irreconcilable certainties. The concept of a true stalemate is a near impossibility and the history of warfare backs me up on this. 
Let's take Korea. a war still technically ongoing and has been in stasis for nearly 70 years...this a stalemate by design.  At a tactical and operational level, absolutely, everyone sitting on the line looking at each other.  At a strategic level, not at all.  We have seen NK develop nuclear weapons and cyber capability.  SK has deepened it relationships with the West and purchased military capabilities.  At the political level it has been anything but a stalemate as both NK and SK try to outmaneuver each other. 
Pick any great stalemate and you will find it really was not.  WWI Western front, yep tactical and operational, and even in some ways strategic.  But a lot of stuff happening elsewhere, not to mention the slow strangling of Germany that eventually decided the war.  Cold War, nuclear equation created a pretty large stalemate framework but on the "margins" of proxy wars and political warfare, not even close to a stalemate.  As in love, war will find a way.
So what?  Well in Ukraine, as Steve aptly points out the one thing that is not static is time.  Right now, time is not on Russia's side by any stretch.  All those sanctions take time but when they really start to land they are going to hurt, badly.  At a military strategic level, one that cannot access full national mobilization, the steady heavy bleeding is adding up.  The Russian system: 1) cannot win employing what they brought in terms of capability, doctrine or training, 2) cannot change the battlespace to favour what they brought - they should have started with that, and 3) cannot adapt fast enough to start fighting the war they are in, and not the war they wanted. 
A lot of discussion on how badly the Russian war machine is broken.  I argue it is much worse than what we see on the battlefield, their very theories of this war are broken.  Here history backs me up entirely - bring a broken theory to a war means you had better be a very fast learner.  And I am not seeing that quality on the Russian side right now.
I have had this weird thought in my head on this entire war, "where have I seen this before?"  And I am going to recommend anyone really interested to read into the War of 1812 fought in North America.  Read Donald Graves series, starting with the Battle of Chryslers Farm and you will see a lot of the same themes throughout.

Try a Bradley turret.
You guys had a living room to our closet!

The Russian troops performance is so abysmal, I don't think they have the skills, discipline and moral to even consider fighting in an NBC environment.  If Putin plays the chemical card, a whole lot of his troops are going to die as well...

Amen, brother.   The worst 8 hours in my military career was 8 continuous hours in full 'Zoot' suit.   I am not exaggerating.  The worst 8 hours of my life in the military.  I hate NBC training....

Its a science, if you forgive the pun, in itself.  Blood agent, nerve agent, choking agent, incapacitating agent, persistent agent, non-persistent agent are just a few variables for starters.  Generally you need mass, so MBRLs in battalion handfuls should be the preferred method of delivery.  Then of course there is the weather factor - wind direction, wind speed, temperature and humidity.
In terms of effect, it is going to depend on whether the folks on the receiving end have equipment to protect themselves against it and, where applicable, have taken drugs to ameliorate the effects of certain agents, and have the means to decontaminate.
They generally work on the basis of being a terror weapon so there is potentially a huge psychological effect but also as just a means of causing casualties that the medical chain has to deal with.  Combine that with AFVs operating closed down and just the rigid PITA of performing basic tasks with a bulky suit on, your view of the world being restricted to two pieces of glass, your ears covered by the suit hood and wearing two pairs of gloves.  Shooting, which I learned was a vaguely important soldiering skill during my time in two armies, in NBC kit is an art in itself.  Now try and write on a log sheet, type on a computer, twiddle the dial on your radio or even speak, listen and be understood/understand on the radio with those gloves and that mask on.

Seriously..W...T...F?!  How do pieces of Russian equipment that are right near the top of the JTL wind up being abandoned because they fell into a ditch?

Don't want to distract from the main Ukraine thread, but I would love to see a meaningful discussion amongst the Canadian members, and other interested allies in another thread (open to suggestions as to most appropriate sub-forum) on what would be the most effective reforms/rebuilding for the Canadian armed forces?  How steps should Canada take to make our forces more effective in light of the reality of the current world that doesn't appear to believe in the post-national ideal?
It would be interesting to hear what changes could be made to procurement policies: for example, given the realization that we are seriously under-prepared for the present situation, what changes can be made such that purchases of foreign off the shelf kit be made easier?
How do you divide the pie between the Army, Airforce, and Navy?
Then you can get into relative merit of kit.
 

I think mistakes were made, to say the least.  In reality this is going to likely go down as a massive Russian strategic failure, possibly nation breaking but we would be remiss not to look in that mirror and recognize that it is also a western failure writ large.  We collectively run the planet (casting nervous glance at China) and as such this mess that took 20+ years to happen has to come home to roost on our decision making.
As to the NATO argument, I guess what sticks is that every former eastern bloc nation who has joined NATO did so of their own free will and for very good reasons.  What happened is akin to watching a man with three wives he abused for years beating the one who stayed behind and blaming the other two who left.  Yes, technically he might have just spread the abuse more equitably but how on earth does that equation get right?!  The US was using the same strategy that won the Cold War, enticement and Russian response with a strategy of bombing or threats of bombing, followed by more bombing cannot compete, and that is not on us.  
I think we in the West do need to take a long hard look at how we basically went past "letting it happen" to "enabling because we like cheap gas and were to busy with our own crap".  I am Canadian and frankly the lines we fed ourselves for over 30 years of a utopian liberal humanistic new world order, and kept smoking right up until Feb 24th meant we lost sight of just how nasty the world was really getting and failed to do anything about it.
I hope that some lines are re-drawn as a result of this and we try and realize that things like freedom and democracy come at costs that every generation must pay, not just the ones in the movies. 

Hey all, there's so many posts that it's easy for someone to miss something.  So there's some duplication.  But multiple posts duplicating complaints about multiple posts then me saying let's not worry about posts about multiple posts takes up more space than simply ignoring multiple posts and posts about posts about complaining about multiple posts. 

You can be an American and care about both - in this case especially the fact that Russia has been acting like a criminal country for ever and ever. 
And, before you ask - US Army Vet, served in Iraq as a medic 04/05, saw plenty of death and suffering while I was there.

Two things that caught my eyes and ears.  The cameraman was riding in what appears to be a civilian vehicle and the leader using what appears to be a civilian "walkie talkie"?  I heard no "chirp" of it getting encrypted but maybe their stuff does not do that?   

So been tracking this daily, now that we are in Day 9.  I do not post my resume, largely because most people would not believe it if I did, so take what I say -as with everything else these days- with a good dose of salt.  But in my professional opinion I would sum up the Russian performance thus far as:

Or better yet, move them.

Hi everyone. Nikita here.
I'm still in Crimea. I have to be careful with every word, especially after being detained on 24th by police and FSB, so I will be brief. I am literally shaking as I type due to adrenaline, but we all need to be strong these days.
1) Ukraine will be free. The bastards will fail. I can clearly see it.
2) We witness an insane amount of heroism. Which is truly inspiring.
3) Thanks to Steve and other people from here who were kind to me in the past and took time and patience to communicate with me. It made a lot of difference in the end and made me a person who I am today.

Can we stop blaming the victim please?    

Can we stop blaming the victim please?    

Can we stop blaming the victim please?    

Can we stop blaming the victim please?    

No, they fired as far as at the day. This warning was about arial and missile strike. As if Tu-160 and Tu-95 took off and will attack.
Though, Zaporizhzhia city now is under heavy ballistic missile fire, our AD working
 

I suspect that UKR people and leaders are just as intelligent and competent as any. I doubt that they will assume that a loud-mouth braggart has-been speaks for the entire US population, and I am in the same political party as him. We also have a “silent majority” that doesn’t align with either ridiculous extreme. I swore an oath to “preserve and protect the Constitution on a number of occasions, and I, unlike some, take my sworn oath seriously.
 
My apologies to all, and probably do “need a vacation.”