Macro Level Threat Analysis

As we try to establish a basis for preparation against threats, it is all too common to not see the forest through the trees, so a discussion of macro level threat analysis may be beneficial.

I expect that we're all familiar with micro level analysis, which addresses the personal level of threats around you, whether from other people who want what you have, or from living along a coast subject to hurricanes, or residing in a country where laws are seemingly non-existent. Each of these is a specific motivator for preparing for the worst as seen through your own eyes.

On the other end of the spectrum, macro level threat analysis encompasses a larger view. There may be elements of threat that you prepare for (e.g. oil supply disruption from a war in the Middle East), but without a well defined view of the depth and breadth of what may trigger that threat. A few examples include the proxy wars now occurring between Saudi Arabia and Iran, Russian/Syrian/Iranian meddling in Iraq, the Kurdish conflict with Turkey, ISIS/Taliban/Al Nusra/Boko Haram terrorist activities, etc. Macro analysis is often ignored because there is truly so much to do at the micro level that it's not always possible to find time to put more on your plate. Another reason for ignoring macro level threat analysis is that most people aren't trained to connect the dots, so they pull out pieces that fit the immediate conversation (oil supply) without necessarily seeing the big picture. But if you can look at the macro level, then you might “see it coming”.

To provide an example of macro analysis, the focus will be on one country that will hopefully let you understand that the whole is a greater danger than any one of the pieces viewed in isolation. Then as news cycles develop around an identified threat, you can think about the waves that ripple across the various pieces within, and be better prepared to determine when all signals have just flashed red.

China and the Fundamental Threat to Our Planet
First understand that this is not a diatribe against the Chinese people. Just like Iranians, Russians, and North Koreans (or French, English, and Americans), the powers of the government are not always reflective of the individuals who make up the state. But to ignore the state because of not wanting to offend the people leads us to blissful ignorance, which is a deadly sin in prepping. In this analysis various factors are laid out that, while not seen as related at first glance, in fact tie together to demonstrate why news from China should be a concern to everyone. Please note that a full scale analysis would take pages, so this is a highly condensed version to give a taste of what might be covered.

1. Global pollution
A snippet from a previous post: “Ten rivers in the world contribute 90% of all plastic pollution to the oceans. Eight are in Asia and two are in Africa. One alone, the Yangtze, accounts for 50% of all plastic pollution.” It's impossible to not talk about China when talking about the death of our oceans. More than fifteen years ago there was an article in CFO Magazine (about doing business in China, not prepping) that referenced a highly toxic spill into a Chinese river. To prevent a humanitarian crisis for a downstream city, the state turned off the water supply to the city for days with no notice. Even city officials had no idea why water suddenly stopped flowing. After the toxic sludge passed the city and made it's way out to sea, water service was restored. Double whammy here; high pollution, and NO accountability from anyone within the state, even to it's own people.

2. Climate change
I've posted elsewhere my views on climate change, which is filled with more lies than truth, but for the sake of argument let's presume I'm 100% wrong. If climate change is real, China is the single largest carbon polluter on the planet. It is well documented that the changes demanded under the Paris Climate Accords, mainly focused on the U.S., would produce infinitesimally small reductions in the carbon footprint. China, not a signer of the accord, will continue to pump more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere than anything that the U.S. can counterbalance. It is known that coal too dirty to be burned here or in Europe is exported to China and used without any stack scrubber systems. The Beijing sky today frequently looks like Los Angeles did in the 80s.

3. Global Debt
I've also posted elsewhere that China, the supposedly second largest economy, is a house of cards. There are repeated stories of the nearly vacant ghost cities (with photos as proof), that were built to inflate economic growth numbers but with no return on investment. Chinese banks (owned by the Chinese state) have amassed unimaginable debt that filters it's way through the global economy. Europe could barely manage the economic failure of Greece (and China owns a significant amount of the shipping port capacity in Greece). No country will fair well in a Chinese debt implosion.

4. South China Sea Hegemony
China continues to build and militarize islands across the South China Sea, and then declare their rights to new-found “territorial” waters around the man-made fortresses. They dare anyone to violate the space and complain loudly when it happens. Currently only the U.S. has the blue water capability of defending open oceans. Even pitiful England, an island, had not one single aircraft carrier until they rushed a new model into service after renewed troubles with Russia/Syria. China will continue to grow stronger and threaten shipping lanes while the rest of the world doddles. China has already had disputes with Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Australia over this issue.

5. Pacific Ocean
China is hell-bent on clearing away Taiwan (under the pretense of saying it's part of China) and Japan (through continued disputes over the unoccupied Senkaku Islands). Japan is slowing moving to change it's constitution to allow for the building of offensive military forces, and China will surely become more confrontational as this happens.

6. Trade
China sustains it's economy by dumping goods into other countries, while imposing tariffs on every import to prevent a cash outflow. An engineering firm that I once worked for had an office in China (probably helping to build ghost cities!) and the revenue from that office was locked so tightly to prevent repatriation of the profit that we essentially kept two sets of books – one for all operations globally, and one just for China. Fair trade is a clear threat to the stability of the Chinese economy.

7. Natural Resources
China has engaged in massive investment throughout Africa to secure the rights to rare earth magnets. These are essential to most technology, especially weapons systems. Needless to say, they are also rare! China has extended loans to the poorest countries on the planet to garner control of this valuable resource. Another double whammy; not only does China lock up the supply, it is concurrently engaged in a new form of colonization. The countries taking China's money will never be ably to repay the loans and will effectively become Chinese colonies.

8. Doklam Platue
China is aggressively claiming territory along the Doklam Platue in the Himalayas. India supports Bhutan's claim to the land, but China has already openly engaged in conflict and has been building up military resources in the area. This area is a basically a very narrow pass from western India to eastern India, surrounded by Bhutan, Nepal, and Bangladesh. A war was fought here between China and India in 1962, which neither side has forgotten. If this pass is cut off (easily done), India's supply lines across its country will be severed and China may quickly establish a near-irreversible stronghold there.

9. One Child Policy
For over three decades, China enforced a one-child policy. The result was that parents favored males and aborted females. Today millions of Chinese males are no longer 1:1 matched with females, as normally occurs in nature. Throughout many natural systems, males fight to the death for the opportunity to mate, and humans are not much different. When large groups of disgruntled males are denied any opportunity with females, it isn't likely to end well. The imbalance in China won't be soon corrected so it's a tinder pile waiting to be lit. Civil war is always less of a bother in someone else's back yard, but a civil war in China can spill over globally in many unforeseen ways.

Conclusion
This is a brief overview to which many more dots could be added and connected but it makes the point that looking at a single issue misses a really big picture. All across China there are issues that appear unrelated about pollution, debt, trade, territorial expansion, or population control. But each is part of a bigger picture based on the master plan that China is formulating to be the final victor on the world stage. As with all such plans, there are at least two problems: 1) Any single effect that emanates outward can do great damage, and more so when compounded by multiple effects. 2) Any plan of such complexity is almost sure to fail. When this occurs, the planner does what any drowning man would do – take someone (or everyone) down with him if there's even a slim chance of ensuring his own survival.

When you see a problem from a macro level, you gain a fuller appreciation of the inter-connectedness of the issues. So as news cycles develop, listen carefully to this story or that about China, or ignore them at your peril. If the dominoes begin to fall, you need to be as aware of debt problems, or incursions into Africa, or tiffs with Japan over barren islands as you are of nuclear missiles flying. In fact, nukes are among the least likely problems because China doesn't want to inherit a radioactive planet. Learn to examine the big picture and connect the dots to really see the full scope of danger.

 

China has a big problem. Too many people and not enough work or food for everyone to have all that they want. On the good side they are doing something about it unlike places like the Indian sub continent and Africa. On the bad side their culture isn't changing to accept the needs of a lowered population. The one child thing isn't really being followed and is creating a sort of sub-level of people tat are treated as throw away people. If a mans wife has a daughter he will dump them and try again with another woman. these throw away women are not considered as really being of any worth and have few rights. On the good since they are worthless they have little trouble leaving China and are coming to the US. These are amazing people and are going to be good for us in the long term. I have a friend that married one of these worthless daughters. She is young, driven and has a PHD already. Her Mother is a Registered Nurse and both are making themselves into not just good Americans but Texan to the bone.

The problem with that entire area is that they have a LOOOOONG history of being predatory against each other and look at each other as lesser almost subhumans. I don't see China, Japan and Korea as ever working well together. It is much like in the Middle East and is an area destined to be at war forever. I just hope that the West will eventually figure out that we need to stay out of their wars and not get chewed up trying to prevent the inevitable.

 

If you make a post and nobody responds you need to go and look in the "NEW" threads and make another post. For some reason until there is a response the post doesn't show up in the recent activity list and just gets lost.

 

I don't know if it is all of that Texdanm....but also that TCinNC's comments and points are too deep for the average television and movie educated Amerians.... not only weak in History but also in geography.

But how about those Kardashians??


China ...to me...is a significant investment of someone in the West...not in China. True China has made a lot of money but someone laid the groundwork for China to become the manufacturing giant she is become today.

And this technology has come from western nations and western infusions of both capital and technology.

I suggest it is the descendants of the same people who built up Nazi Germany between wars...the same who transferred massive technology and know how not only to Germany but also to Japan...and also to Korea...now to China.

And these transfers of technology and capital is what has built China to what she is today....not without problems...but these investors are not interested or loyal a country per se...but only as it has to do with their investments.

In short they are loyal to their investments.... not a nation or people.


These people are predatory and have been going back to Ancient Rome...Greece...etc etc...and mostly loyal to their investments.

 

Re: #8

China has purchased Nepal. Done deed.

Bangladesh, China can make them happy.

Indian Ocean mega-port, not a problem. All the pieces are in place. Russia bought India. China's ready to go. Now the USA is in the way. Collectivists take U.S. Congress = the toilet flushes on America.

 

Redux/2019
With the new year come three stories that reminds us of the continued need for threat analysis at the macro level, and the necessity of constant monitoring to ensure that we're seeing the trend speed and direction. Two of these are referenced in my original analysis by number, as follows:

5. Pacific Ocean
At the start of 2019, in an address given by Chinese President Xi Jinping, he repeated the PRC's long-standing dismissal of a free Taiwan. Xi stated that “Reunification is the historical trend and the right path. Taiwan independence is ... a dead end” followed by “We make no promise to abandon the use of force, and retain the option of taking all necessary measures.” While this is not technically new news, it does point strongly to the expectation of the new year potentially yielding new conquests for the PRC. The strength and frequency of such language, in the case of China, often portends action. Some countries (e.g. North Korea, Iran) are known for hyperbole and bluster. Others, like China, are more akin to the rattle of a Diamondback. Don't ignore the warning!

7. Natural Resources
At the end of 2018 rumors swirled that China would take control of a prized port in Mombasa, Kenya. Kenya accepted large loans from China to build infrastructure, notably the Standard Gauge Railway (SGR), which links Nairobi and Mombasa. The SGR is operated by the Chinese and has lost $100M in it's first year, leaving Kenya unable to make payments on the $5B loan to build the railroad.

This follow closely on the heels of a deal in Zambia, which may lose its international airport and its national power grid because of defaults on Chinese loans, as well as in Ghana, which is seeing it's largest mining companies taken over by China.

Although these are not direct grabs of natural resources, it is an offshoot of the same lending scam that allows Chinese entry into the African continent that is rich in natural resources. As valuable assets are grabbed due to loan defaults, the countries become more beholden to China. Once these countries are colonized, the earth beneath their feet is China's to plunder.

Weapons
Although not part of the original analysis (as being too obvious), China's weapons development continues to move forward with reports of an electromagnetic railgun deployed on a Navy ship, and work on a hypersonic weapon system. Although the U.S. is also developing an electromagnetic railgun, a successful deployment by China would beat the U.S. by years. Likewise, although Russia has developed a hypersonic weapon, a dual threat from China would leave the U.S. completely outmatched.

The focus of this isn't to warn that China has dangerous weapons (really!!), it's to point out that the technical advantage long held by the U.S. has slowly been slipping away, and may already be lost. Be assured that no country in Europe, nor India, Canada, Japan, or Australia will pick up the slack if the U.S. falls behind. Some may not see that as bad, but most freedom lovers know which side their bread is buttered on.

 

I don't see China and Russia as much of a dual threat. they loath each other and fear that is either were to get involved in a war with the US that the other would take advantage of it and invade them.

China's biggest weapon is a just HUGE population that they are more than willing to use with little concern for casualties. If the world were to have a massive world wide depression I suspect that China would start a war with someone just to occupy the minds of their people. this has been a common historical technique they have used.

I don't have a lot of fear of the Russians. They are a lot like us and don't really have the civilian support or control to engage in a big war. The losses in WW2 followed by the purges of Stalin then the decades of "communist" rule and oppression has left them tattered. they did about as well in Afghanistan as we did in Vietnam. notice that they learned and have not done that stupid crap again while the US seemed doomed to replay that mistake over and over getting involved in "wars" that we can't win because we won't truly fight it as a war.

China is preparing to make a move on Taiwan. they are building up their navy and building islands in the china sea. we need to say out of it! The cost to the US if we get involved will be astronomical and may end up with China grabbing Japan and South Korea. The US has exported their manufacturing ability. In WW2 we converted our various factories from domestic products to making weapons and such. Now we buy everything from Japan, China, Mexico or Pakistan. Even our Auto industry now is mostly assembly plants with the motors and parts made out of the country.

I think that before we could get up and running again we would be fighting China off the West Coast. China will have learned from the mistakes that Japan made. If Japan had taken Hawaii it would have made a big difference. We thought that they were going to do it and were actually preparing for it. they actually took ALL of the cash money out of Hawaii and replaced it with special "Hawaii" dollar that had no value other than in Hawaii.

.

 

TexDanm,
I won't imply that Russia and China would automatically ally themselves against the US in open warfare, but either one would certainly kick us if the other had us down. We have no defense against hypersonic weapons, so facing two at once would hurt. I agree (twice) that a danger with China is predicated on their willingness to start a war just to occupy their people's minds, and that the threat from Russia is far less for us (although not for Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia -- just ask Ukraine their thoughts on that subject).

I disagree wholeheartedly on China's biggest weapon being their population size. Conventional warfare is long past... no more troops and tanks meeting on the battlefield. Nor do I believe that nukes are the new option (I'll eat crow on my way to hell if I'm wrong on this one). The main threat will be cyber warfare; a viral attack against our banking system, communication system, and/or power grid. Any one of these would be an unmitigated disaster. Couple this with key strikes using hypersonic weapons against military targets to blunt a retaliatory attack and all we have left is the thought that somewhere out in the depths of the oceans, our submarine fleet might (might, not certain beyond doubt!) avenge our destruction.

 

The problem with nukes and trying to fight a war strictly from long distance is that in the end you cn't win. The US has done that over and over since the Korean war. Even if you use nukes you will still eventually have to go in on foot and take possession of the target or all you did was make a lot of people very very angry. Our unwillingness to do this is why we got chased out of Vietnam, Why the Russians got run out of Afghanistan and why we will never win in the Middle East in either Iraq or Afghanistan. fighting someone to a temporary standstill is not the same as winning a war.

I believe that either Russia or China could win in any war that didn't involve fighting in the US. Too many years of liberal closing bases and cutting spending, we can't really field a real professional army anymore. Desert Storm was fought with weekend warriors from our national guard, Coast Guard and reserve people.

The reason that I have little fear of either of them actually trying to invade or attack the mainland US is because even in their win they would lose because we would shred them with our assets and then they would be easy pickings for which ever was uninvolved. Situations like this have been common through out history. To some extent England couldn't put a full effort into fighting in the US when we declared our freedom because of their ongoing wars with France.

Any country trying to take on the US in the mainland part would be facing endless troubles. As we found out in our last several skirmishes the military doesn't come off too will against guerilla warfare in the natives country. One they got past California in an invasion they would run head on into people that can easily make kills at 300 yards plus and then vanish. In Texas we are about as well armed as an invading force would be.

In the end I think that China will be happy to take and control the Far East and Russia has never really had much interest in much past the Baltic states, the Balkans and Eastern Europe. The Americas and Western Europe should be fairly safe for another generation if the Liberals don't just gut us and hand us over to whoever will make them the best deal.

 

Correct. The person was Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, one of the most brilliant warriors (on any side) in World War II. Yamamoto had, back in the 1920's, been a naval attache in Washington DC, traveled extensively here, and knew more about us than our military knew about the Japanese.

 

Chinese and American battle ships heading toward each other today in a game of chicken over disputed waters . I wonder if either one will back down and lose face . Has all the potential of a naval battle .

 

I think I am going to get a little extra gasoline this evening for my utility mule so as to make it easier to fetch water from the creek just in case the united states and china get into a conflict within the next day or two . Probably won't happen but as a prepper that's just the way I think . If it does happen I would expect the power grids in both countries will be attacked .

 

The Japanese military didn't want to involve us at ALL. They were ordered to do it and the admiral was quoted as saying that he feared that they had woken a sleeping dragon. Unfortunately we were going to force them to involve us one way or another. We were already "in" the war before Pearl Harbor. I had family in the military in Canada before the US entered the war and there were others that were flying for China before Pearl Harbor. The Flying Tigers were giving them a fit. The Axis powers agreed to split the US attention never expecting us to be able to handle a two front war. Japan bombed Pearl Harbor and Germany declared war on us together before we declared war on either of them. the US was in an isolationist period and the people in general didn't want to go to war. FDR had to force it on us.

 

Seriously, what are you prepping for?

Although what follows is not a macro analysis per se, it is a threat analysis which might be of interest to some of you.

 

Seriously, what are you prepping for? part 1

1. Introduction

I suppose you could say I’ve been a prepper since the late 70’s when I first go a copy of Mel Tappan’s Survival Guns and found the Mother Earth News. If you’d asked me what it was that I was hoping to “survive”, I couldn’t have told you with any certainty; it could have been a general nuclear exchange, a high morbidity/high mortality pandemic, a failure of the economic system, or any of a bunch of other scenarios, some sensible, and some downright silly.

Plus, of course, it was a good excuse to buy more guns and a roto-tiller!

It wasn’t until about ten years ago, when I was in an MBA program (already the oldest student in my class) that I realized that I didn’t have any survival plan. Sure, you say, we all have plans: when TSHTF we will pick up our BOB here, grab the AR and the 12-gauge and the junk silver, jump in the BOV (or hunker down), and then survive, right?

That’s not the kind of plan I’m talking about. I was in a study group of older grad students, all of us with some interest in prepping, and we realized that there were three very important constraints that stood in the way of any successful plan for a SHTF scenario:

1. We had no idea as to what kind of S was going to HTF (and we certainly couldn’t agree among ourselves what kind of S it would be);

2. We couldn’t possibly prepare for all (or even most) of them.

3. Even if we knew what could happen, we had no way to know what amelioration approach would work.

The methodology that follows addresses the first two considerations.

2. But first, two assumptions.

“Where would you go/what would you do if money were unlimited?” That’s a fun subject for a late night bull session lubricated by a couple of pitchers of beer, but the fact is our money (and our time) are not unlimited. Let’s accept the fact that we simply can’t plan and act for every possible contingency. Try to pare down the possible scenarios to a reasonable number.

“What are the obvious choices?” Uhh… no. Your “obvious” may not be mine. Unless you’re planning for your own contingencies and no one else’s, you must be able to look objectively at all the possibilities, which means that everyone in the planning should have a chance to present their ideas, without others jumping on them. You (and the majority of the group) may find that Joe’s idea of preparing for a 15-kilometer comet strike or the second coming of Jesus. That’s okay; you can vote it down later. But first hear Joe down, write it out, and let him make his pitch. Look at all the possibilities; they’ll sort themselves out soon enough.

 

Seriously, what are you prepping for? part 2
3. Okay, here we go.

The first step is to bring the group together, with all the members (spouses, too) each with a pad of paper, a pencil, and the understanding that there WON’T be any discussion or argument at all for now. Each person, without looking at or talking with anyone else, should write down the three scenarios they think is the most worrisome. Write them down in order (1, 2, 3) write your name, fold the paper and pass it to the person coordinating the exercise.

The coordinator makes a single list, eliminating duplicate scenarios, not ranked or anything, and then reads the items on the list aloud. The rest of the team can (and should) make notes, but no comments yet until everything is read.

The second step is to vote on the 5 (or 6, or 7) scenarios that have the most going for them. Each person should have a chance to stand up and read her first-choice scenario and explain why she considers it important. At this point, the rest of the team could ask for clarification and point out additional considerations. No personal comments or insults! If you get involved in a urinary Olympiad, it’s just going to make the resulting decisions harder to reach.

Once the discussions are over, each person should take another piece of paper and write down, in order, the three scenarios that concern him. Don’t sign your name, just fold them up and hand them in to the coordinator who will score them like this.

2 points for each third choice,
4 points for each second choice,
6 points for each first choice.

Add the numbers up for each scenario and take the top six scenarios, and discard the rest. Those six will be your candidates for working on.

[NOTE: if there is a person whose top choice is not among the six chosen and he simply cannot agree with the group’s choice, he’s in the wrong group. Nothing wrong there; you can still be friends, but if his heart isn’t in it, he (and the rest of you) would be better off if he left.]

4. We have our six finalists; let’s rank them.

Some things are more likely to happen than other things, Some things may cost more money, some may take more time, others may happen is six months or six years; some, if they happen, would be annoyances, while others would be a life-or-death situation So how do you resolve that?

The best approach is to quantify them; that is, assign a number value to each of about five measurements. For each candidate you should ask these questions:

· What is the chance of this happening within six months? 6 for very likely, 4 for somewhat likely, 2 for not too likely

· What is the chance of this happening within two years? 6 for very likely, 4 for somewhat likely, 2 for not too likely

· How long would the effects of this issue last? 8 for the rest of our lives, 4 for several years, 2 for several months

· How serious would it be if we don’t address it? 6 for “it could kill us”, 4 for It could cause long term trouble for us all”, 2 for “it could be pretty annoying”

· How much would it cost for us to fix it? 8 for being pretty cheap (e.g., a 14-day issue like a blown transformer knocking out electricity for a couple of weeks); 4 if it’d cost each team member $2,000 each; 2 if it’d cost each team member $10,000 or more each.

 

Seriously, what are you prepping for? part 3

Conclusion

See how it works? The higher the total number is, the more likely you are to work the issue. A high-priority item might be something likely to last for a long time and could result in death, expected to happen within three months. Something that might happen in six months, would be no more than a short-term annoyance, but wouldn’t cost too much to fix might be worth working on to get it out of the way.

The thing to remember is to fix the important stuff – if you can. If you see a problem which can only be resolved by selling all your stuff, quitting your jobs and moving to Broken Pelvis, Montana on top of a mountain -- and you don’t have a couple of hundred thousand dollars among yourselves, don’t waste your time. Work on something else.

Notice that I’ve talked about group efforts, but this same approach can be used by yourself or just within your family. The important thing is to try and be objective when you’re examining and grading possible scenarios.

Remember that this isn’t a foolproof approach; there is none. Despite our best planning, Lord Krishna could come riding in on another dinosaur-killer comet which lands right in the middle of the Yellowstone caldera. We just can’t be sure.

But I think that this approach, if followed carefully, will improve your chances of being at the right place before the wrong time gets here!

 

Duncan,
Thanks for following up with this!

But I'm missing a step, or misunderstanding a step, at the following point:

"The coordinator makes a single list, eliminating duplicate scenarios, not ranked or anything, and then reads the items on the list aloud. The rest of the team can (and should) make notes, but no comments yet until everything is read.

The second step is to vote on the 5 (or 6, or 7) scenarios that have the most going for them."

How did we get from vanilla listing to identifying the 5-7 scenarios that have the most going for them? If it's going to revert to each person pitching their favorite form of death , then why not have them ranked before they come to the coordinator? Or is there a voting process after everything is read that filters out these 5-7 scenarios? If so, then why re-rank them as the next step as stated in "4. We have our six finalists; let’s rank them."?

It's been a long day for me today -- sorry if I've taken the obvious and converted it to mud!

 

Oooops! There should be a second voting process that further winnows out the six or so selectees to three; this will give the team more time to do a coherent ranking of the three or so finalists. Bear in mind that , while it's fairly easy (or at least easier) to determine the chances of the scenarios happening -- based on past history -- it's going to be quite a bit harder to estimate and quantify the 'cost to ameliorate' because in order to do so, the team has to figure out what to do and how to do it: Pool money and buy a remote wilderness hideout? move to a small town? beef up and button up a survival in place? Just that would require a whole other week's worth of discussion!

I think that a better winnowing process (like maybe with two votes) would give us better results. BUT, our colleague TMT Tactical makes an excellent point: "paralysis by analysis". The important take-away, as far as I'm concerned is that the team (if it's more than just a single family) needs to have everybody on board if the enterprise is to work, and the best way to 'align the AR-15s' is to give every member a say in what they should do together.

 

We used to call that process Brainstorming. Everyone was encouraged to present ideas. No value judgments were made. No idea was discarded, or criticized. All were discussed equally and the ayes and nays noted. The process encourages everybody to participate without fear of criticism and ridicule. Two heads are better than one. If we all think together, and work together, especially if it is a common goal, we should arrive at an acceptable solution.