I. Introduction

This blog is directed toward a Domino Theoretic analysis of Political Violence or, more specifically, an abstract conceptualization regarding the symbol-target duality represented by the Iranian Natanz Reactor given its psychological-behavioral dualistic counterparts and given a relevant, prevailing historical antecedent in the form of 9/11.

It's fundamental aim is to explicate certain of the complexity of the Natanz conundrum as UN Security Council negotiations regarding the Iranian nuclear program remain in process, in a politically tense post-9/11 world, utilizing tools consistent with engineering system dynamics (note - Eisenhower) and which remain consistent with fundamental applications of the broader " scientific method " as it regards a historical challenge such as that of the prospect of nuclear war, of not unequally enormous complexity and proportion.

First, what does the Natanz symbolize, in general, yet also in particular, in a " post-9/11 " world ? How might a behavior-perception duality interact fundamentally with it's symbolically dualistic counterpart ? Are these systems, as they might be called, interacting, or " coupled oscillators " of some variety, the kinds of conceptualizations commonly utilized for the purposes of analysis in the physical sciences ?

II.

The notion of " post-9/11 " world is a condition, a political condition, in which, generally speaking, political violence, in some form, exists, persists, unfolds, and both deterministically, with some sense of historical inevitability, perhaps even fatalistically, and willfully, cognitively, self-reflectively, or conscientiously, proceeds in either escalating fashion in a direction of remission. Violence is merely an expression of that condition, however virulent, tragic, morbid. Yet, considering its implications, or prevailing motivations, might violence give rise to political structure, or form, such as that of democracy; might structure or form, or some form of " nurture, " give rise to violence ? What sort of structure is it, primarily, that's been, historically, or being, nurtured ? ( History Channel Osama/ Washington Times ) Is violence a by-product of instability ? Whether or not political violence should or can be characterized as " deterministic " or motivated by some form of " free will, " which would necessarily entail some measure of self-reflection consistent with conscience, or the absence thereof, has long been a complicated line of inquiry. Is violence that's political, sociopathic ? Is political violence, strategic ? Does it intend to elicit a response ? Is that response healthy, productive ? Can it be self-destructive ? Can it be deterministically, inevitably, self-destructive ? What combination of variables renders such an idea as that of inevitability ? Can democracy be a redeeming mitigator of sorts ? What role does the media play in a democracy or, more broadly, in terms of its formation, the formation of a civil society in general ? ( conditions - media - states of mind ) Is Iraq the analog of an industrial accident ? Is it an encapsulated version of Heurich ? How did conditions and states of mind, the fundamental building blocks upon which any Domino Theory, sociopsychological or otherwise, interact in which a way that an invasion was rendered ? Or was Iraq really an unfulfilled, yet not unself-fulfilling prophecy ? How is it possible for expectations to result in conditions that justify the states of mind that underlie behaviors, perhaps those of states, perhaps interventionist ? How do the ends justify the means ? Is there a conceptual framework within which such an inquiry might be addressed ? Are expectations, suggestive ? Do they suggest some form of historical antecedent which might imply an element of determinism ? Is expectation a necessary condition for preemption, and if so, what role do conditions, or their variations therupon, play, in such an analysis ?

What " Domino Theory," first made famous by H.W. Heinrich, in his intensive scientific study of approximately 30,000 industrial accidents, holds, is as thus: conditions, lead to states of mind, which result in behaviors, which lead to incidents, accidents, or catastrophes. Domino Theory is consistent with its broader counterpart formally recognized as the " scientific method, " and similarly shares an analogy with the chemical kinetic concept of " chain reaction," which naturally begs the logical inquiry: can a sociological Domino Theory derived in behavioral psychology, particularly that of leaders and states, prevent a chain reaction in the form of nuclear war ? Would it be fair to assume nuclear war as a possible consequence of current conditions as they dictate relations among leaders and states ? Is terror a catalyst for such a chain reaction ?

As a theory of behavioral psychology, Domino Theory can likewise be stated as thus: stimuli result in perceptions, which result in tactics, which lead to historical events. Domino Theory is also a system dynamic, or dynamical system theory, involving feedback - a feedback control system, which can be expressed mathematically:

c = conditions
s = states of mind
t = tactics ( strategy is oppositional tactical integration )
e = events


1) dc/dt = k1*( t - e ): interplay of tactics and events
2) ds/dt = k2*(p - c );
3) dt1/dt = - t1+ k3* ( c - t1 ): choice of behavior regards how states of mind are affected by conditions
4) dt2/dt =- t2 + k4*( s - e): deterministic
5) dt3/dt = - t3 + k5*(c - e ): free will
6) dt4/dt = - t4+ k6*( c - s ): pathological-predatory(1)/conscientious
7) de1/dt = k7*( e2 - e1 ) + k8*( c - t ): every event contains an historical antecedent, or association;
8) de2/dt = k9*( e1- e2 ) - k10* ( c- t ):
9) t = t1+t2 + t3 +.....tn



II. Tactical-Strategic Behavior and The Economic Long Wave


III: Target-Symbol-Tactic-Association: A Deterministic System ?

IV: A System Dynamic Expectation-Pre-emption Sociopsychological Theory

Mathematical Statement:

-- Association With Historical Antecedent
-- Condition as Form of Government
-- Geopolitical, spatiotemporal, contiguity: primal dominos

conditions: fundamendalism, nuclear weapons, dictatorship

1) dc1/dt = c2
2) dc2/dt = - c1
3) symbol
4) target
5) d (exp)/dt = c2 - som1
6) d(som1)/dt = som2
7) d(som2)/dt =- som1 + exp
8) event: strategic/tactical


Objective: Peace; Convergence of Conditions
Means: Intervention

Question: Is revolution inherently democratic ? Can it result in dictatorship ?

1) c1
2) c2
3) c3
4) c4




V: Simulations

VI: A Modicum-Strategem For Negotiations: Intervention and Control Theory







1) Strategic Behavior seeks to alter what affects tactics, rather than tactics themselves, and may even, under certain conditions, be characterized as pathological, at least where its intent may be predatory
2) In a model
3) What kind of strategy takes into account conditions, states of mind and tactics in either series or parallel, and in what forms to achieve its end ?