OODA is naught but a way of *sequencing* some worthy (but vague) steps into a do-loop. The boundary-management (what things do you *consider*) is necessarily a source of ambiguity.
To show its bona fides, the claim here has to defend the complex transaction that it proposes. Iran 'snuck through' the membrane of the rigorous OODA loop that, of course, describes actions without predicting detailed outcomes?
What is the state of the art with models of complex phenomena. Like, oh, I don't know--an airborne military action that took out 90% of a terror-sponsor nations's military hardware within weeks?
Here's an example of the failure of common, academically accepted models of *complex phenomena.* Two psychiatrists (who have MD degree + psych) separately diagnosing the same patient have only two chances in three of coming to the same diagnosis. Add a third psychiatrist, and the likelihood that *all three* will agree--in a blind test, the gold standard for model conformance--drops to one chance in three. (Coping With Psychiatric and Psychological Testimony, Jay Ziskin)
Does an OODA loop have a permeable boundary? And, how do we know Trump is using it or even knows about it. Do OODA loops exist in the ether around human consciousness? Do they form up unbidden, whether the person at issue knows it or not? Does this hypothesis outperform the field of psychiatry, which has a one-in-three chance of identification, with a *single person* as subject matter? I think its an interesting analysis hooked to a weak hypothesis that has little predictive power.
I take it from your comment that you haven't read anything that Boyd wrote. I heartily recommend that you read "Patterns of Conflict".
As to Trump's "use of it", to use your words, I would bet serious money that there is no coherent process involved, so, yes, Iran is operating inside it. Trump has fallen into a trap of his own making and, like someone caught in quicksand will only make matters worse by his continued flailing.
The Bannon approach of flooding the zone with shit may be effective in bamboozling the MAGA base and the clueless MSM, but it is a guaranteed way of losing a war.
I responded to Martin Manley’s post. Didn’t know Boyd’s name, so I tracked him down as the OODA originator.
It’s a military model “…designed for air combat and campaign-level competition.” (Perplexity Ai)
Models percolate outward from their origins, mostly failing, and occasionally succeeding. Even more rarely, a model achieves maturity in applications that have some un-obvious simlilarities to the model’s origin.
The OODA commentary in the post showed no signs of an upgraded 2nd, 3rd, or 5th-generation model that could handle international relations with a theocratic dictatorship. It originated for fighter jets in dogfights.
Anyone who takes on Iran because they believe they have a “coherent process” is guaranteed not to accomplish 5% of the eetbacks than Iran has suffered.
“eliable reports from U.S. Central Command and major news outlets detail significant destruction of Iranian military assets amid ongoing hostilities since late February 2026.
Naval Assets
The U.S. destroyed 16 Iranian mine-laying vessels near the Strait of Hormuz, part of efforts to counter threats to oil shipping. Over 130 Iranian ships and 92% of major warships have also been eliminated, marking the largest naval loss for Iran since World War II.
Weapons Production
More than two-thirds of Iran's missile, drone, and naval production facilities, plus shipyards, have been damaged or destroyed, severely degrading combat capabilities. Over 8,000 military targets struck include missile bases, air defenses, drone facilities, and command infrastructure.
Nuclear Facilities
Key nuclear sites like Fordow, Isfahan, and Natanz have been heavily damaged or obliterated, with U.S. assessments confirming severe setbacks to enrichment programs, though some repairs may be possible.
Leadership and Other Targets
Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was killed, along with 49 other senior figures and Revolutionary Guard command centers. Nearly 10,000 civilian and cultural structures, including historic palaces in Isfahan, were also hit.”
The differences among metaphors, analogies, proven models, and predictive power are suffering badly in this exchange of opinions. I'm a models guy. Showed my credentials. Signing off now.
Thank you for sharing. Would you, Professor Sweeney, Joyce, George Costigan, Suite Sister Mary, Tamie Swain, Brian Sinks and all please also see/share our information from Captain Dan Hanley, Captain Rob Balsamo, Amber Quitno, Professor Tony Martin, Scott Hagen, Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, Professor Graeme MacQueen and others and help us improve it if you can. Thank you!
I don’t want to sound like a one time infantryman, air power is great, love it. Bring hell down in your enemy.
But, unless some crusty sergeant or some young LT, if the sergeant gave him the handset, says we got it. It ain’t yours, it’s theirs.
Be advised I am not recommending this! I was appalled that some AirPower jock took advantage of the administration by letting them think their strategy would work, no boots on the ground “surgical precision” and all that crap.
Excellent thank you. I am glad this piece was in my feed. Brian Beutler, recently spoke about the OODA Loop in his Off Message, and I was glad to read more about it with your perspective, here.
Models, models, models. OODA!!
Been studying models since 1980, with multiple academic publications on *the limits of models.*
https://www.academia.edu/33494476/Models_limits_suggest_reflexivity_in_nature
OODA is naught but a way of *sequencing* some worthy (but vague) steps into a do-loop. The boundary-management (what things do you *consider*) is necessarily a source of ambiguity.
To show its bona fides, the claim here has to defend the complex transaction that it proposes. Iran 'snuck through' the membrane of the rigorous OODA loop that, of course, describes actions without predicting detailed outcomes?
What is the state of the art with models of complex phenomena. Like, oh, I don't know--an airborne military action that took out 90% of a terror-sponsor nations's military hardware within weeks?
Here's an example of the failure of common, academically accepted models of *complex phenomena.* Two psychiatrists (who have MD degree + psych) separately diagnosing the same patient have only two chances in three of coming to the same diagnosis. Add a third psychiatrist, and the likelihood that *all three* will agree--in a blind test, the gold standard for model conformance--drops to one chance in three. (Coping With Psychiatric and Psychological Testimony, Jay Ziskin)
Does an OODA loop have a permeable boundary? And, how do we know Trump is using it or even knows about it. Do OODA loops exist in the ether around human consciousness? Do they form up unbidden, whether the person at issue knows it or not? Does this hypothesis outperform the field of psychiatry, which has a one-in-three chance of identification, with a *single person* as subject matter? I think its an interesting analysis hooked to a weak hypothesis that has little predictive power.
I take it from your comment that you haven't read anything that Boyd wrote. I heartily recommend that you read "Patterns of Conflict".
As to Trump's "use of it", to use your words, I would bet serious money that there is no coherent process involved, so, yes, Iran is operating inside it. Trump has fallen into a trap of his own making and, like someone caught in quicksand will only make matters worse by his continued flailing.
The Bannon approach of flooding the zone with shit may be effective in bamboozling the MAGA base and the clueless MSM, but it is a guaranteed way of losing a war.
I responded to Martin Manley’s post. Didn’t know Boyd’s name, so I tracked him down as the OODA originator.
It’s a military model “…designed for air combat and campaign-level competition.” (Perplexity Ai)
Models percolate outward from their origins, mostly failing, and occasionally succeeding. Even more rarely, a model achieves maturity in applications that have some un-obvious simlilarities to the model’s origin.
The OODA commentary in the post showed no signs of an upgraded 2nd, 3rd, or 5th-generation model that could handle international relations with a theocratic dictatorship. It originated for fighter jets in dogfights.
Anyone who takes on Iran because they believe they have a “coherent process” is guaranteed not to accomplish 5% of the eetbacks than Iran has suffered.
“eliable reports from U.S. Central Command and major news outlets detail significant destruction of Iranian military assets amid ongoing hostilities since late February 2026.
Naval Assets
The U.S. destroyed 16 Iranian mine-laying vessels near the Strait of Hormuz, part of efforts to counter threats to oil shipping. Over 130 Iranian ships and 92% of major warships have also been eliminated, marking the largest naval loss for Iran since World War II.
Weapons Production
More than two-thirds of Iran's missile, drone, and naval production facilities, plus shipyards, have been damaged or destroyed, severely degrading combat capabilities. Over 8,000 military targets struck include missile bases, air defenses, drone facilities, and command infrastructure.
Nuclear Facilities
Key nuclear sites like Fordow, Isfahan, and Natanz have been heavily damaged or obliterated, with U.S. assessments confirming severe setbacks to enrichment programs, though some repairs may be possible.
Leadership and Other Targets
Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was killed, along with 49 other senior figures and Revolutionary Guard command centers. Nearly 10,000 civilian and cultural structures, including historic palaces in Isfahan, were also hit.”
Res ipsa loquitur. The thing speaks for itself.
The differences among metaphors, analogies, proven models, and predictive power are suffering badly in this exchange of opinions. I'm a models guy. Showed my credentials. Signing off now.
A lot of modern wars turn on this asymmetry.
The weaker actor does not need to match force.
It only needs to generate economic, political, and infrastructural consequences faster than the stronger actor can reorient.
Indeed the American Revolution is a sterling example; a rag tag bunch of colonists up against the biggest best trained and equipped army in the world.
Marty,
Thank you for sharing. Would you, Professor Sweeney, Joyce, George Costigan, Suite Sister Mary, Tamie Swain, Brian Sinks and all please also see/share our information from Captain Dan Hanley, Captain Rob Balsamo, Amber Quitno, Professor Tony Martin, Scott Hagen, Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, Professor Graeme MacQueen and others and help us improve it if you can. Thank you!
https://michaelatkinson.substack.com/
🦖👀
Stunning read. Something wise
For Trump it’s just an ODA loop.
Interesting …
Not particularly difficult.
Look at the guerila warfare Mao enacted on his opponent Chiang Kai-shek: be like water - formless.
I don’t want to sound like a one time infantryman, air power is great, love it. Bring hell down in your enemy.
But, unless some crusty sergeant or some young LT, if the sergeant gave him the handset, says we got it. It ain’t yours, it’s theirs.
Be advised I am not recommending this! I was appalled that some AirPower jock took advantage of the administration by letting them think their strategy would work, no boots on the ground “surgical precision” and all that crap.
Trump is escalating. Now I know this I have been watching has a name. Thank you.
Or you could just wait a week.
Excellent thank you. I am glad this piece was in my feed. Brian Beutler, recently spoke about the OODA Loop in his Off Message, and I was glad to read more about it with your perspective, here.
Wait… wasn’t this the David and Goliath story?
No. That was more like an Achilles Heel parable: even a Goliath should be wearing a helmet.
Excellent Marty…
Thank you for this single example :-)