Defense and the National Interest

Sep.01.2008
4:59 pm
by Chet

Is McCain Inside Obama’s OODA loop?

Charlie Martin makes the claim in The American Thinker that McCain’s choice of Palin as his running mate shows that McCain is inside Obama’s OODA loop:

At this point, we’re seeing that McCain is completely within the Obama campaign’s OODA loop — they are out-thinking them and out-acting them — and very probably the McCain campaign has a tighter envelope than the Obama campaign, as well.

Is this true? What does it mean to be “inside someone’s OODA loop”?

The closest Boyd came to defining “inside the OODA loop” is probably on chart 132 of Patterns of Conflict:

Observe, orient, decide and act more inconspicuously, more quickly, and with more irregularity …

or put another way

Operate inside adversary’s observation-orientation-decision action loops or get inside his mind-time-space.

As John used to explain it in his briefings, it basically means to change the situation faster than the other side can cope. So Martin’s concept is pretty close to what Boyd had in mind. By the way, the rest of chart 132 lays out the effects on opponents of operating inside their OODA loops.

Is McCain inside Obama’s OODA loop? The correct answer is that there’s no way to tell. It’s probably true that the Obama campaign was as surprised as anybody else at the specific choice of Sarah Palin. They would have been equally surprised if he had chosen me (and I have gobs more defense and foreign affairs cred than she does).

However, to operate inside an opponent’s OODA loop, you have to do more than just surprise people, you have to be able to exploit that surprise to stay inside their loop. Otherwise they may recover, learn from the situation, and come back stronger. So since we (meaning I) don’t have a good picture of what’s going on inside the Obama campaign, we can’t make an accurate judgment at this stage of whether McCain is inside anybody’s OODA loops. Back in January, Chuck Spinney posted a sophisticated and prophetical look at political campaigns operating inside their opponent’s OODA loops that describes what we’d expect to see.

My guess, and this is purely a guess, is that the only surprise was the individual picked. The Republicans had to pick a person who is very conservative both religiously and politically or risk their base staying home on election day. These folks are already suspicious of McCain and if they sit the thing out, McCain loses by 20 points.

It might also help if the pick has little foreign policy experience because any otherwise suitable Republican with a significant track record in international issues would be too closely tied to the policies of the Bush administration and, of course, to the results of those policies.

So I think the category of the pick was entirely predictable. If the Obama campaign is and remains flummoxed, then maybe McCain is inside their OODA loops — we should know more over the next few weeks.

I’ve also had some posts on the concept, albeit in a different context, on chetrichards.com: Select “Boyd’s Theories” and scroll down.

Comments are welcome; please observe our comment policy.

Filed in Boyd and Military Strategy, Leadership |

26 Responses to “Is McCain Inside Obama’s OODA loop?”

Fabius Maximuson 01 Sep 2008 at 8:21 pm 1

You mean “rapidly doing crazy things” does not equal “getting inside your opponent’s OODA loop? Who knew?
Duncan C Kinderon 02 Sep 2008 at 12:29 am 2

In descriptions of chess games, remarkable moves receive punctuation marks to identify themselves.

For example, in some hypothetical game White’s remarkable 12. Nbd7, might be celebrated “12. Nbd7!” or even “12. Nbd7!!”

Unfortunately, not all remarkable moves are good moves; some are bad.

In which event we might have “12. Nbd7?” or even “12. Nbd7??”.

Some remarkable moves are risky but promising, “12. Ndb7!?” or puzzling “12. Ndb7?!”

Right now, I would annotate the move “McCain picks Palin” as “McCain picks Palin?” If I were obliged to wait and see, the issue would be whether it would be better annotated “McCain picks Palin??” or even “McCain picks Palin???”

[CR: A brilliant idea! I used to play a lot of chess in college and remember that notation well, esp. the multiple question marks.]
gpanfileon 02 Sep 2008 at 7:33 am 3

Given how well the Democratic convention went, and the myriad of unexplored potentially damaging things surrounding Palin (troopergate, bridge to nowhere flip flop, Alaskan Independent Party membership, etc.), could not the converse be true, that the Obama campaign has penetrated McCain’s OODA loop? When is the last time a successionist ran for major office?

[CR: I don't know. Jefferson Davis? As for who's inside whose OODA loops -- that's a possibility, too.]
Newjarheaddeanon 02 Sep 2008 at 11:28 am 4

AHOY
Out of all the other people that could have been on the short list Palin was one of five or six I heard mentioned lost of times on CNN. So I find it difficult to believe any one would be shock at the choice. I believe any governor should have the brains to handle the role which I’m afraid is all it is. And the dirt is the common denominator control mechanism of all those who get to play. I’ll never believe the dirt on John Edwards was not known before it was revealed. Mc cain is a maverick fighter pilot not the ICE MAN of top gun. He’s added the parity women but he dose not seem to be able to capitalize on Obama’s mistakes and back sliding. It makes me sick to here about this going left (IMO for the public) to get nominated then center (IMO party insiders) to get elected. IMO the Obama side dose have to be careful about how they beat up either one of the other opponents.
rmhitchenson 02 Sep 2008 at 12:29 pm 5

Losers lashing out can be construed as getting inside their opponents OODA loop, but when that’s all you’ve got left, it doesn’t do you much good. Military historians can argue that Hitler got inside the Allies’ OODA loop with the 1944 Ardennes offensive, but it didn’t even come close to stopping the steamroller they faced. The Palin choice looks like McCain lashing out in a (so far futile) attempt to gain the upper hand over an opponent who (despite what Newjarheaddean says, above) has built a very strong coalition while making very few mistakes.
Cheton 02 Sep 2008 at 12:52 pm 6

rmhitchens,

Good point. Achieving surprise is an important tactical principle, but it’s rarely decisive by itself. What you do with the opportunity that the surprise creates is the real test of operating inside an opponent’s OODA loops.
Ed Beakleyon 02 Sep 2008 at 12:56 pm 7

The issue of Gov Palin’s selection has been characterized as a question of her foreign policy experience. If that is a legitimate question, then no governor of any state is qualified, indeed the only non Washington insiders even close to being qualified as having experience with dealing with foreign policy things are Mayors – New York Miami, and Los Angeles.

Has John McCain not recognized a stagnant model, re-oriented and created a new context – a new Snowmobile? Does Slide 14 of “Strategic Game of ? and ?” not apply:

“Survive, survive on own terms, or improve our capacity for independent action.

The competition for limited resources to satisfy these desires may force one to:

• Diminish adversary’s capacity for independent action, or deny him the opportunity to survive on his terms, or make it impossible for him to survive at all.”

You may not like John McCain, you may believe our world can be fixed by just getting rid of President Bush, but in the words of Thomas Friedman, McCain created a “new context, a new narrative and a new imagination.” In proper context of VP running mates, can that be said of the choice of Senator Biden?

[CR: The idea that no experience is required to be President is an interesting one. It suggests that we could save a lot of aggravation, not to mention money, by dispensing with the election and holding a lottery.]
Newjarheaddeanon 02 Sep 2008 at 7:13 pm 8

AHOY
Ed Beakley great point, yes leaders of city states, i would agree CEOs too, but then you’ve got the problems of to much infest interest i believe. Chet I’ve been saying for years, that after a total upgrade of the education system a lottery system that would do away with career politicians is the way to go. You could retire (for security reasons) on a government pension if you held one of the highest of positions. Governing should not be complicated if we fallowed the constitution. I once heard Robert Novak (AKA the prince of darkness) say someone once asked him how he dealt with all the back stabbing lying double talk etc., of politics and he said he answered them by saying “I just love it”. I would one day like to tell him and those like him, then you just deserve it. But I wont it run right, so get out of the way. IMO this election is between old white crackers and new world order and if the new win and Obama dose not deliver it well be the death nail of the two sided coin game.
Fabius Maximuson 02 Sep 2008 at 11:18 pm 9

Palin’s nomination has brought forth many folks saying, as Chet notes, that no experience — or perhaps just “life experience” (e.g., 10 years in San Quentin) — should be considered necessary for presidential candidates (this is more extreme than saying *either* domestic or foreign policy experience is needed).

Taking this to its logical conclusion, we could adopt Athen’s practice, where the Archon’s were selected by lot from among Athen’s citizens. This is the ultimate campaign finance reform: no campaigns. No opportunities for political corruption or bad judgement by voters.
Cheton 03 Sep 2008 at 4:04 am 10

Ed B. wrote:

You may not like John McCain, you may believe our world can be fixed by just getting rid of President Bush, but in the words of Thomas Friedman, McCain created a “new context, a new narrative and a new imagination.”

Apparently Friedman has had second thoughts. From his column in today’s New York Times:

With his choice of Sarah Palin — the Alaska governor who has advocated drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and does not believe mankind is playing any role in climate change — for vice president, John McCain has completed his makeover from the greenest Republican to run for president to just another representative of big oil.
cynicalon 03 Sep 2008 at 6:10 am 11

Seems to me that the selection of Palin was done on the basis of identity politics. That is, the McCain campaign knew that his ‘base’ wanted an Evangelical Christian, who was very anti-abortion, and picked the best example of that, disregarding other factors like policy experience or lack of corruption. The fact that she’s a young, attractive woman helps McCain because it distracts the cameras from his aged image and seems to balance his ticket gender-wise. In my mind, this pick is all about identity politics and image. It may indeed be effective, and it was certainly the pick to shore up the support of McCain’s base. Whether independents, or disgruntled Clinton supporters, will be attracted to Palin, is another question entirely.
Maxon 03 Sep 2008 at 8:39 am 12

“Achieving surprise is an important tactical principle, but it’s rarely decisive by itself. What you do with the opportunity that the surprise creates is the real test of operating inside an opponent’s OODA loops.”

Exactly, Boyd couldn’t have said it better. [CR: That's no coincidence.]

Putting it another way, I think the key lies in the ability to think ahead,
and stay ahead, in sustaining that position for at least most of the time.

A single event in of and of itself is not nessesarily decisive.

And thus it’s far too early to pass judgement.

Lew Rockwell had an interesting take on that choice.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/palin-tragegy.html
Maxon 03 Sep 2008 at 9:23 am 13

“Achieving surprise is an important tactical principle, but it’s rarely decisive by itself. What you do with the opportunity that the surprise creates is the real test of operating inside an opponent’s OODA loops.”

Using a 3rd generational conflict, that’s well illustrated
by the outcome of the Japanese attack on pearl harbour,
in contrast to the far more decisive battle of midway.

M
senor tomason 03 Sep 2008 at 7:25 pm 14

Five years from now, in the first year of President Barack Obama’s second term, the name Sarah Palin will be the question to an answer on the game show Jeopardy.
Maxon 04 Sep 2008 at 8:25 am 15

Ahh, there’s nothing like good ol’ down home, grass roots,
common sense, in the spirit of the great recently retired
and favourite of mine, the Great Charlie Reese.

Here’s an example (sarc) there’s just no getting around
this impecible logic here, backed up by all the facts that have
surfaced, since.

“you can argue with me son, but you can’t argue with figures !”*

*Foghorn Leghorn/WB Classic cartoon character.

http://tinyurl.com/5ws58g

“ANCHORAGE, Alaska - Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin told ministry students at her former church that the United States sent troops to fight in the Iraq war on a “task that is from God.”"

Certianly the calibre of pepole we need to lead OUR America !

M
Barryon 04 Sep 2008 at 11:52 am 16

Most people thought that the idea that Obama would be selected was crazy.
Obama doesn’t just spout rhetoric he embodies it, what the politicians pay lip service to he is and the result is the normal political tactics — personal attacks — don’t work.

McCain hasn’t got a clue how to combat Obama’s media appeal.
KoWTon 04 Sep 2008 at 4:01 pm 17

I find the “McCain is inside Obama’s OODA loop” rhetorical device clunky.

The goal, as I have it modeled, is to make it so that your opponent’s OODA Loop is entirely contained within (or “inside”) your own OODA Loop. In smack talk parlance, it goes something like this “hey loser, I won because your whole OODA Loop was inside the first O of my OODA Loop.”
Ed Beakleyon 05 Sep 2008 at 2:47 pm 18

“You mean “rapidly doing crazy things” does not equal “getting inside your opponent’s OODA loop? Who knew?” Fabius Maximus

The “ACT” element of OODA is almost never discussed. Indeed Col Boyd’s initial perspective the question “why F-86s were able to do so well against MIG 15s” is often characterized as trivial or pushed under the rug so as not to belittle the “bigger” context.

Indeed, “Forty Second” Boyd was not born of a nice essay through O to O to D to A, and arrival at “aha!” guns, guns, guns, you’re dead! In the real world the “act” piece must very likely be extremely violent and disorienting, possibly leading to an aerodynamically out of control situation in which “not crashing” becomes the first priority not starting your next OODA loop. Truth be told not every fighter pilot has the requisite skill to attempt even to learn those maneuvers. And even if practiced and capable sometimes the MIGs and SAMs win. Sometimes the fight goes on and on.

If ever the term “dogfight” were appropriate, it seems so now. But most rhetoric immediately turns to “I’m right, you’re wrong - and stupid to boot!!” If we could park that by the door until on the way out to vote on 4 Nov, we might recognize an information rich setting for analysis/synthesis, destruction/creation in regard to OODA Loops and Snowmobiles. Did Col Boyd ever say “all snowmobiles are successful?”

OBTW, that fact that even the good guy can find a MIG on his tail on occasion doesn’t reveal him as a bad pilot.

We seem to look at OODA Loops as if we’re always starting in control. To me the more interesting and informative is a “negative OODA” start. But that’s just me. Check six, ya’ll.

[CR: Not bad for a fighter jock.

Boyd used to say that without the A, the rest of the loop is naval staring (sorry). Moreover, a typical Boyd maneuver was (in his own words) "jerky" (it would have been non-differentiable and even discontinuous if he could have managed it) and so a lot of the imagery associated with dueling OODA "loops" -- one side gradually closing in on the other -- is misleading at best.

I didn't have the honor to be a fighter pilot, but it seems to me that you've laid out the case very well. Many thanks!]
Maxon 06 Sep 2008 at 9:08 am 19

“The “ACT” element of OODA is almost never discussed. ”

Excellent disertation Ed, excellent!
So much to say in reply, so little space.

I don’t have the military background, but have experience
in automotive racing (motorcycles), and know enough on a cognitive as well as instinctive level to endorse your assertions 100%.

As has Chet.
“Moreover, a typical Boyd maneuver was (in his own words) “jerky” (it would have been non-differentiable and even discontinuous if he could have managed it) ”

A very close associate has told me that “Boyd scared” a lot of his
would be opponents, and that includes friends and foes alike, ” to death in the air.”

Detractors might have called him a thourghly dangerous lunatic, friends who understood and admired the man, at best might say, a bit of a wild man, effective and highly gifted, but by any rational standard, still a wild man.

One is reminded of aggressive but highly gifted risk takers, in the automotive racing world, and particularly the likes of Aryton Senna, and Gilles Villenenuve, of F1 fame. Both did things with their cars that their contemporaries (among elites themselves) could not believe.

It’s true that very, very, few are cut out for that role.
And thus the rarity of the breed, call them Ace’s among Aces ?

Among most who obtain that status, that by Boyd’s
standards could be considered cautious, even ponderous
and slow.

That raises an interesting point and somewhat of a contradiction,
whereby in a non-combat scenario, smoothness and fluidity of
action are associated with high competence.

Boyd went an entire dimention behond, that seemingly broke all the rules.
M
Barryon 06 Sep 2008 at 10:38 am 20

The description of what Boyd actually did in a plane is very helpful.

US Marine pilots invented a new maneuver in the Harrier by doing something “crazy” when they switched on the landing thrusters in mid flight for a 90 degree turn.

It ought to be remembered that McCain crashed after hitting power lines.
The media don’t like Palin.
Punditarianon 06 Sep 2008 at 11:46 am 21

Chet writes that the idea is interesting, that no experience is required for the Presidency. I’m sure it is an appealing notion to Senator Obama’s campaign.

It is probably more fair to say that experience is not the only requirement for a successful President or Presidential candidate, that different kinds of experience might be offset or balanced against other desirable qualities.

In past elections, Americans have almost invariably if not invariably preferred a man of action who speaks his mind directly to a pettifogging self-described intellectual (I am thinking particularly of the Eisenhower-Stevenson elections). Especially when the candidate’s overly-nuanced hemming-and-hawing, subordinate clauses, and hypothetical asides are intended to conceal his views from an electorate he rightly surmises would find them repugnant. As in the current situation.

The idea that our national leaders could or should be chosen by lot from the right pool of candidates has been broached before. William F. Buckley once said something to the effect that he would rather be governed by the first 2,000 names in the Boston phone book than by the dons of Harvard.

Since this discussion began on September 1, it should be evident that the selection of Governor Palin was a masterful stroke that revealed Senator McCain’s tactical and strategic prowess in this election. Initially derided as a sop thrown to disappointed Clintonites, the selection’s first effect, as noted in the comments above, was to invigorate the GOP’s conservative base and establish a perpetual treaty of non-aggression between Senator McCain and evangelical Christians who were previously dubious about him.

Governor Palin’s subsequent performance at the Convention, and on the campaign trail since then; her nearly 60% approval rating among voters of both parties; the enormous sympathy generated by her appealing personal story; the evidence of her knowledge and experience regarding the energy issue, the most important economic and overall foreign policy issue in this election; — all this suggests that the question marks should be taken off the chess notation for this action of Senator McCain’s.

Whether his campaign is truly moving inside the Obama campaign’s OODA Loop will be revealed in future moves. The fact that the GOP standard bearer is dead even in polls that have not yet fully reflected the gigantic audiences that watched Governor Palin’s and Senator McCain’s speeches, given the media’s fawning adulation of his opponent and the unpopularity of the sitting GOP President, suggests that Senator McCain has been inside the Obama campaign’s OODA Loop for some time.
cyberdocon 07 Sep 2008 at 10:16 pm 22

Remove the man from the plane and the OODA Loop formula changes bigtime (eg. Blackswift). McCain adroitly recaptured many of us with the “American Woman” who reminds us of our wives, daughters, or how we’d like them to be. Comfortable at the controls of her hubby’s Super Cub, quartering out a moose, facing the challenges of her fifth child. The 20% that were looking at Bob Barr need look no farther. Yes, McCain is way inside O’s OODA Loop. I especially enjoyed seeing Col. Bud Day sitting about three rows back smiling ear to ear at his old buddy, wearing his old AF leather jacket. Who else noted it? The media certainly made no comment (and who cares about the media anyway? they are discredited) A very quiet and greying Army will make this happen. Polls tonight showed McCain pulled ahead to highest level ever 48% to 45%. Even Susan Estrich stood up for Palin against the media detractors.

[CR: Col Day was interviewed several times during the convention. Note to our readers, this is not a political site. While you certainly have the right to believe that Sarah Palin is qualified to put her finger on the nuclear button, that is not a topic germane to this site.]
diggeron 08 Sep 2008 at 8:49 am 23

[Comment deleted. Please observe our comment policy re: topical issues.]
Maxon 08 Sep 2008 at 9:06 am 24

“US Marine pilots invented a new maneuver in the Harrier by doing something “crazy” ”

Good example Barry.

Not to stray too far, but In order to indulge the hapless “GEEKS” amoung us, within whom I claim lifetime commitment,
You might be refering to “Viffing” reverceing thrust in midflight causing an opponent on thier 6 o’clock to instantly overshoot, and thus turning the tables.

Boyd was acredited with accomplishing similar in stalling and subsiquently recovering (no easy task/Superhuman perhaps ?) the F-100.
http://tinyurl.com/4pzc
http://tinyurl.com/5qdvf7
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jp3dIeDQ_kU

Not sure though if the marines”invented” the technique however,
but if that’s how they sell it, sobiet.

Used to considerable effect, by the Brits, against much faster Mirage fighters in the Falklands conflict in conjunction with advanced versions
of the Short range heat seeking sidewinder missle.

A usefull trick, however all things considered, and although better than most, Harrier is not regarded by those in the LWF community as the ultimate dog fighter.

It pays a severve weight, complexity, and range penality for the VSTOL capability, (Boyd et al, despised such gimmicks,) and including grossly insufficent wing* area to qualify.

This has current implications for the current, and vastly cost overrun JSF program.

*Source; The Incomperable Mr. Pierre Sprey.
For more information please visit;
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LWJF/
MC
Maxon 08 Sep 2008 at 9:13 am 25

“The media certainly made no comment (and who cares about the media anyway? they are discredited)”

Anyone catch the Bob Woodward interview on 60 minutes ?
I caught the last several minutes, it’s dynamite.

http://tinyurl.com/555pvq

M
Maxon 08 Sep 2008 at 9:34 am 26

[CR: Comment deleted.

We're starting to wander far off topic, so I'm closing this thread. Perhaps we will revisit it in a few weeks in the context of OODA loop theory when we have more data.]

Is McCain Inside Obama’s OODA loop?

26 Responses to “Is McCain Inside Obama’s OODA loop?”

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Categories

Archives

Blog Authority

Pages

Blogs

Other Sites