Post-strike monday

Gloves

1. Panel members: Gloves had Hughes, Lt Col Davis, and Gardner (AWC)

2. Types of questions asked: Old theorists vs. new IW; role of technology in strategy; role of AF in COIN; Mao and culture vs. technology; what did you learn at SAASS?

3. Anything you might have done differently in preparation? I could have done one more quick scan of the 600 wiki entries

4. Any other comments: Spend more time silently formulating a response - key criticism was that my responses were "undisciplined."

Push

1. Panel members: Push had Chiabotti, Maj Bryan, and Dr. Hemmer (AWC)

2. Types of questions asked: Started w/ the thesis, and linked the concepts from the thesis to the rest of the curriculum; Classical military theorists vs. the airpower theorists (similarities and differences); an appraisal of strategic/tactical airpower in WW2; Concept of "interest" in Thucydides;

3. Anything you might have done differently in preparation? No.

4. Any other comments: Receieved one critique for fairly long and roundabout answers -- i.e. doing a "lit review" at the start of my answers.

Oz Riley

1. Panel members: Dolman, Frazier, La Saine

2. Types of questions asked:

a. Do we spend too much time talking about and studying WWII history ... in general? (La Saine) ... and in the SAASS curriculum? (Dolman)

b. You spoke out against objective control and professionalization of the military. What should be the role of military officers in Politics? Wouldn't we be better served if military leaders focused on their specific jobs, rather than giving opinions outside their areas of expertise? (Frazier)

c. One of our senior leader visitors predicted that we would be at war with Iran within the next 18 months. What do you think of that? What should be the military's input into that conversaiton? (Dolman)

d. One of the things we've discussed in class is an apparent lack of strategic vision and strategic direction in US policy. In order to help the US develop a strategic vision, what would you say the United States should be focusing on? What should we be trying to achieve? (Frazier)

e. In light of your position on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, how would Walzer view the last 10 years of American policy? (La Saine) If a nuclear weapon goes off in the United States and the nuclear material can be traced back to Iran, given Walzer's arguments about proportionality, would he say it would be more acceptable to attack Iran with a massive conventional force or to detonate a similar yield nuclear weapon in Iran? (Frazier)

f. Biddle and Pape both make arguments that many people see to be critical of airpower in general, or at least strategic bombing in particular. Are their arguments complimentary to each other? Do you agree with them? How would you respond to them? (La Saine)

g. Tell us about top two "a-ha" moments you had while at SAASS? (Dolman)

3. Anything you might have done differently in preparation?

I think it is a very valuable technique to sit down with a clean sheet of paper and map out the top 5 or so concepts that you personally think are the most important elements out of the entire SAASS curriculum. What resonated with you? How do you make sense of everything we've done this year? Organize your own thoughts and perspectives and formulate your wheelhouse. My conversation primarily went through the doors that I opened. My preparation failed me in that my wheelhouse was created from several big concepts that were very hard to describe and articulate. I should have spoken my wheelhouse concepts out loud several more times than I did.

After you have your main thoughts in order, the most valuable preparation technique for me was to go through the list of questions and look for areas where my general knowledge of the facts was not up to snuff. I did some extra brushing up in areas where I was weak on the basic facts and concepts of particular works, which was beneficial. In the end, though, there are a billion specific facts and figures in the curriculum, and you can't know them all. Having a broad-brush understanding of all the general concepts is important because you don't know where the questions will start out. However, it's more important 1) to be able to tie your answers back into your wheelhouse, and 2) to ensure that your wheelhouse is big enough that it can easily sustain a 2+ hour conversation without being boring or repetitive. My exam only covered an extremely small sliver of the entire SAASS curriculum.

4. Any other comments:

It's a good technique to answer the questions like we were told to write our Blue Darts ... first, answer the question. ... next spend time justifying the answer and discussing other elements and considerations. If I failed anywhere, it was because I didn't answer the questions, or I spent my time thinking out loud hoping to stumble upon an answer I was satisfied with. There's room for equivocating and dancing around things, but it's also important to actually answer some of the quesitons that come your way ... especially when they draw your attention back to the main question two or three times. I wasn't so into that as a technique. I still passed, but I could have done better if I had a point and articulated it up front before I started rambling.

Give me a call if you have any specific questions you think I can help you out with. -Oz

1. Panel members

2. Types of questions asked:

3. Anything you might have done differently in preparation?

4. Any other comments:

1. Panel members

2. Types of questions asked:

3. Anything you might have done differently in preparation?

4. Any other comments:

1. Panel members

2. Types of questions asked:

3. Anything you might have done differently in preparation?

4. Any other comments:

1. Panel members

2. Types of questions asked:

3. Anything you might have done differently in preparation?

4. Any other comments:

1. Panel members

2. Types of questions asked:

3. Anything you might have done differently in preparation?

4. Any other comments: