Best Powerpoint Evar: Army Captain's "How to Win in Anbar"

This is just brilliant, a powerpoint presentation using stick figures to explain what's going on in Al Anbar province. Unfortunately, the author, Capt. Travis Patriquin, died in an IED attack. But his powerpoint lives on!

This is the sort of thing our leaders should be reading, not some stuffy study group report.

[edit]

Fear not, it's in PDF format ...

Best explanation evar

This is truely the best powerpoint ever.

(Note - do you know where use of the word 'evar' came from?)

Crazed Rabbit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

(Note - do you know where use of the word 'evar' came from?)

---

I'm far from internet-culture literate, but one theory (!!! I'm absolutely not sure) is appropriately geeky:

Neon Genesis Evangelion, a.k.a. Evangelion, a.k.a. Eva, is an infamous anime as equally despised as it is worshipped, and is well known throughout sections of the internet where the geeks reign, which is almost everywhere (except the porn) anyway.

That's what I use it for anyway.

Though I suspect it's just another 4chan relic, moar!

As of the topic: I believe he should be posthumously made general...

That really was a great powerpoint presentation!:2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

throughout sections of the internet where the geeks reign, which is almost everywhere (except the porn) anyway.

---

Yeah, geeks and porn, that's crazy. No way would that ever happen!

I'm inclined to think that evar was a common typo that caught on. A bit like 'teh'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big King Sanctaphrax

I'm inclined to think that evar was a common typo that caught on. A bit like 'teh'.

---

I think 'a' and 'e' buttons are a little too far apart, though; 'teh' is just 'the' quickly and sloppily typed in the wrong order, while 'evar' requires one to press an extra 'a' instead of the 'e'.

Then again, I am analyzing keyboard patterns of a bunch of idiots who couldn't even type basic English, which is kind of idiotic in and of itself. :dizzy2:

Your explanation is probably right.

[/OT -- I promise I'll stop posting now]

That's... genius! :idea:

Further evidence that Bremer fubar'ed the reconstruction. :shame:

This man should have led the recontruction ! :shame:


About the 'evar' thing, I thought it was derived from the way some people (LA valley ?) pronounce 'ever'.

Quote:

---

Further evidence that Bremer fubar'ed the reconstruction.

---

????????????
Isn't the whole sad fiasco just one screw up after another .:yes:
Blame all of the muppets Xiahou , not just the administration appointed CPA .

One thing about the good late Captains powerpoint .
Isn't there a bit of a problem concerning local militias becoming the local police ?
You know that little thing about them strange people in police uniforms kidnaping and killing people because they are of the wrong tribe/sect or follow the wrong sheik , plus of course stopping or refusing to help the coilition if the wanted suspects are members of the "right" tribe/sect or follow the correct shiek .
Just a thought like :shrug:complicated crap isn't it .

That is a good thought, Tribesman, but maybe the indoctrination in police training can negate that.~;)

Well, Tribesman has a point about the police...they're just armed thugs, after all, but they're run by a government, which makes them easier to control, in the American soldier's view, than a tribal leader who is essentially a warlord.

The bit about the moustache strikes very true in my mind, however, but I didn't think US army policy allowed facial hair. Such a backward policy, that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoreBag

Well, Tribesman has a point about the police...they're just armed thugs, after all, but they're run by a government, which makes them easier to control, in the American soldier's view, than a tribal leader who is essentially a warlord.

The bit about the moustache strikes very true in my mind, however, but I didn't think US army policy allowed facial hair. Such a backward policy, that.

---

Did DA have a moustache while he was in the Marines? Or does the USMC have a different policy to the army?

I suppose you'd have to ask him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoreBag

Well, Tribesman has a point about the police...they're just armed thugs, after all, but they're run by a government, which makes them easier to control, in the American soldier's view, than a tribal leader who is essentially a warlord.

The bit about the moustache strikes very true in my mind, however, but I didn't think US army policy allowed facial hair. Such a backward policy, that.

---

Well for most militaries enlisting means they own your arse, litterally and figuratively. So facial hair requires written permission from ones superiors. Stupid as that sounds. When I was trying to join a reserve regiment a friend who was already in told as much.

I thought that presentation was a hoot. But I thought conservative muslims favored beards over mustaches. Didn't the Taliban require all men to grow a beard?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoreBag

The bit about the moustache strikes very true in my mind, however, but I didn't think US army policy allowed facial hair. Such a backward policy, that.

---

Your allowed moustaches that do not go beyond the curve of the top lip. No beards allowed however.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

I thought that presentation was a hoot. But I thought conservative muslims favored beards over mustaches. Didn't the Taliban require all men to grow a beard?

---

There is a directive in the Koran about men having to have facial hair. Fundie Muslims take this a you must have a full beard that hangs down a few cm from your chin. Moderate Muslims settle for a moustache.

Quote:

---

That's what I use it for anyway.

Though I suspect it's just another 4chan relic, moar!

---

Well, the first time I saw it was on the natural selection forums years ago, though using the word 'hover'. Some quake kiddy was posting ways to make NS better and said they needed a 'scorpion that hovars without flapping'.

Redleg, do you know the reasoning behind the 'no beards' policy?

CR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoreBag

Well, Tribesman has a point about the police...they're just armed thugs, after all, but they're run by a government, which makes them easier to control, in the American soldier's view, than a tribal leader who is essentially a warlord.

---

The trouble is that if you're sending some warlord's armed goons off for police training and equipping, they usually are still the warlord's armed goons when they come back- now just trained and outfitted on the government's dime who can go arrest and murder their enemies under the guise of being police.

I guess the real problem is finding which warlords and goons that you can trust to work in your interest and training them. :idea2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Redleg, do you know the reasoning behind the 'no beards' policy?

CR

---

I was once told it was because with sideburns and beards the protective mask would not seal correctly. I suspect however that it also had to do with fieldcraft and keeping people healthy when they are in the field.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xiahou

The trouble is that if you're sending some warlord's armed goons off for police training and equipping, they usually are still the warlord's armed goons when they come back- now just trained and outfitted on the government's dime who can go arrest and murder their enemies under the guise of being police.

I guess the real problem is finding which warlords and goons that you can trust to work in your interest and training them. :idea2:

---

That's why you need Saddam back in power. He's proven he can bring a brutal stability to Iraq, and he has broadly the same principal aims as the US, eg. being a fanatical opponent of both Iran and Al-Qaeda.

Thats why we were all friends in the '80s. Ah, for the '80s.

As usual you make a nice point about corrupt Police. The point is though, what else are you going to do? The Sheik is still going to be a big wheel. The truth is that America's pathological hatred of heritory authority has held them back. The Sheiks should have formed the upper house of the Iraqi government.

Either way Iraq is going to stay Tribal so you have to work with it.

somebody show this to Dubya (then have them explain it to him using really small words) and you guys might actually pull something off over there in Iraq.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Redleg, do you know the reasoning behind the 'no beards' policy?

---

It's also an old British army policy. Leftover? Maybe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xiahou

The trouble is that if you're sending some warlord's armed goons off for police training and equipping, they usually are still the warlord's armed goons when they come back- now just trained and outfitted on the government's dime who can go arrest and murder their enemies under the guise of being police.

I guess the real problem is finding which warlords and goons that you can trust to work in your interest and training them.

---

This is true. The key is to have precautions in place in order to strictly monitor and reprimand 'unsavoury' behaviour in order for the policing to be effective, which is the case basically everywhere.

Re: beards. I don't think it was a leftover British policy - by the American Civil War weren't beards and mustaches in style and worn by soldiers of both sides?

//Sorry for OT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoreBag

This is true. The key is to have precautions in place in order to strictly monitor and reprimand 'unsavoury' behaviour in order for the policing to be effective, which is the case basically everywhere.

---

Well, if the police get rid of the insurgents you now have only one group of thugs to worry about. I guess that's part of the reasoning. It's important that they concentrate on getting rid of the insurgents first before starting the in fighting though.

That's one thing they always seem to get wrong in the middle east, you destroy the mutual enemy BEFORE you start the in fighting (see also: Palestine). If they ever discover this principle than God/Allah help us all...

Thing is a lot of the Sheiks are NOT merely armed thugs, they merely want to have some power (even if it is only symbolic). If you look at how the British did things in Basra at the very start of the occupation, they got all the Sheiks together and sat them round to figure out what to do, and they didn't cause very much if any problems. If you get the Sheiks on your side they will not bite the hand that feeds them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grey_Fox

Thing is a lot of the Sheiks are NOT merely armed thugs, they merely want to have some power (even if it is only symbolic). If you look at how the British did things in Basra at the very start of the occupation, they got all the Sheiks together and sat them round to figure out what to do, and they didn't cause very much if any problems. If you get the Sheiks on your side they will not bite the hand that feeds them.

---

Agreed, but none of these solutions built around local warlords - whilst pragmatic - further the stated aim of the regime change: i.e. to introduce a stable western-style democracy into the Middle East as a catalyst for others.

If all that happens now is a retreat into Saudi-style authoritarism in return for "favours", we might as well have left Saddam alone and bought him off.

Would have been a damn sight cheaper.