Consider the strategy inherent to these questions.

1. Does Israel have the ability to cause severe damage to Iran’s nuclear sites and bring about a major delay in the Iranian nuclear project? And can the military and the Israeli people withstand the inevitable counterattack?

2. Does Israel have overt or tacit support, particularly from America, for carrying out an attack?

3. Have all other possibilities for the containment of Iran’s nuclear threat been exhausted, bringing Israel to the point of last resort? If so, is this the last opportunity for an attack?

This, according to a published article based on face to face interviews with key Israeli leaders is how they are thinking about responding when and if they believe Iran will possess nuclear weapons. The long article develops their strategic planning over the past ten years and the following tactics. In many ways, the article is a blueprint for thinking and acting, strategically and tactically. I highly recommend that anyone who pretends to persuasion maven status read it.

I observe and approve of the clear-eyed or hard-headed focus on concrete outcomes. The strategy produces observable, countable, physical changes. There’s no flowery self-persuasion as if you need to justify the strategy to yourself. It directly aims at doing explicit activities at an explicit group of Other Guys. A persuasion plan falls naturally out of the strategy behind these three key points.

The three key points also provide a great hierarchy of concerns. The first concerns sheer ability and enhancing that. The second concerns allies and public opinion. The third seeks alternatives to the first point. You know how to prioritize with this hierarchy and you also understand you need to address all three simultaneously.

The article then develops how this strategy has played out and is playing out in tactics, some of which I consider as persuasion plays rather than power plays. Even events that involve killing people function more persuasively than just the removal of a key Other Guy. Such violent acts frighten some Other Guys who remove participation or support for the Iranian project – that’s delay and damage. These acts also encourage internal dissenters and opposition. Finally, these acts force potential allies to think about the Iranian project.

It’s also interesting to note how talkative these Israeli leaders are right now. Normally you associate silence with Israel on issues like this. They do or don’t do what they do and always refuse public comment on everything. The fact of their public talk demonstrates a more clear communication application of persuasion than the persuasive effects of killing lead scientists. Consider this quote from Ehud Barak, the defense minister of Israel.

At various points in our conversation, Barak underscored that if Israel or the rest of the world waits too long, the moment will arrive — sometime in the coming year, he says — beyond which it will no longer be possible to act. “It will not be possible to use any surgical means to bring about a significant delay,” he said. “Not for us, not for Europe and not for the United States. After that, the question will remain very important, but it will become purely theoretical and pass out of our hands — the statesmen and decision-makers — and into yours — the journalists and historians.”

Here the Israelis are using fairly traditional persuasion – interviews with journalists – as a persuasive tactic in the service of the three key points. This interview and in particular this quote speaks directly to the second key point regarding allies. We see an Argument from Barak regarding the Iranian nuclear project and what should be done and that Argument is aimed squarely at allies, especially the US.

Regardless of your opinion on this issue, please see the persuasion planning and execution in it. Focus on the three key points that express the strategy and their implications for persuasion. Learn how to devise strategy that is this clear, behavioral, measurable, and operational.

The American intelligence and defense communities have become enthralled by the possibilities of social media. They’re looking to use the networks to forecast political unrest, spread friendly messages, spot emerging terror groups — and even predict the next natural disaster . . . A new project from U.S. Special Operations Command, on the other hand, looks to create something brand new: a “user-generated social media radio application powered by the human voice, available on the PC, Mac, Android, iPhone, and Nokia smart phones, that lets users share their thoughts and experiences.” And this voice-activated SOCOM network is being billed explicitly as a tool for “military information support operations” — shaping public attitudes.

Now. Let’s look at social media from a financial and investor perspective. How’s it going with Google+?

NEW YORK (TheStreet) — When it comes to web sites and apps, active users totals issued by companies are often hard to interpret, unreliable or just plain jacked up.

The writer then details the lack of details about Google+ and its success or failure. He notes that none of the social media monsters can produce a reliable metric of communication and persuasion impact. He cautions caution to investors about Google and by implication all other social media. So, I guess, if it’s your money, you might want to think about it, but if it is taxpayer money, you don’t?

And, we know the numbers don’t add up with Google+ along with the other gang of suspects. As noted recently, 80% of these IPO are trading below their opening day price. There is not as much there as some people thought and bought.

If You Cannot Count It, You Cannot Change It!

What’s the count? Sure you can count the number of devices and network links and data packets and on and on with measures of technology and reach, but what about counts on Changing the Other Guys and how They think, feel, or act?

Warfighting is different from persuasion even though both seek to Change the Other Guy. With warfighting, a new technology that reaches the Other Guy almost certainly also Changes the Other Guy. Bang! With persuasion, a new technology may reach without Change. Hello!

Realize the trap here. People are looking at devices and content for their persuasion when the maven realizes that persuasion produces its effect through function. An iGizmo is what it is, but has no inherent persuasion function. Just having it does not win hearts and minds.

Count the Change. Please.

This photo is from a rare Obama press conference at the Pentagon to discuss the future direction (PDF) of the US Military. Talk about tight lips. Even the smiles are only mouth. Why? Trying reading that pdf Guidance document, especially the italics. Start here.

For the foreseeable future, the United States will continue to take an active approach to countering these threats by monitoring the activities of non-state threats worldwide, working with allies and partners to establish control over ungoverned territories, and directly striking the most dangerous groups and individuals when necessary.

Hey, we’ll whack Bad Guys where we find them and we will be looking. Sounds tough, almost Bush-y Except.

However, with reduced resources, thoughtful choices will need to be made regarding the location and frequency of these operations . . . However, U.S. forces will no longer be sized to conduct large-scale, prolonged stability operations . . .

Oh. We’ll be Thougtful Whackers using Nudge rather than Push!

The White House has charged McRaven’s Spec Ops team to Nudge Assad out of Syria. They’re going to hit all his men’s rooms and swap out the urinal cakes with new ones that have Resign Now! in Arabic on them.

Volunteers for that adventure in applied persuasion?

The image combines two Rules:  All Bad Persuasion Is Sincere and Persuasion Is Strategic Or It Is Not.  We have the maternal combination of mother and child, but mom is smoking hot.  Does she or doesn’t she . . . do what exactly?  Pick whatever TACT you prefer and the Blonde can deny it, confirm it, or ask you to move closer.

Now consider this word picture.

During the Bush Administration many former generals appeared on TV to provide expert comment on actions in the War On Terror.  Some observers cried foul, perceiving the dark hand of SecDef Donald Rumsfeld as the man behind the curtain, manipulating public opinion.  Sure, they are retired and independent.  Sure, they are unbiased and objective purveyors of fact.  Well, according to the story, a two year investigation conducted by the Obama Administration (!!! aka, not the Bush Administration !!!) has found no such conspiracy.

I have always admired the persuasion and power skill of the Bush Administration.  They used words to accomplish change in freely choosing Other Guys and no one was sure whether the Administration was run by Idiots or Propagandists.

There’s a Difference between Persuasion, and Smoke and Mirrors; With Persuasion the Illusion Lingers.

is our missing Beast of Kandahar, I’ll personally escort Mr. Ahmadinejad to Al’s Beef in Chicago and pay for every inch of beef sandwich plus peppers that he cares to consume. Sure, we’ve got to check all the possibilities including an Iranian Dr. Evil; that’s due diligence. But, this has got to include a large measure of PT Barnum because of the combination of two persuasion concepts: 1) the Queen of Tomorrow and 2) the Rule, There Are No Laws of Persuasion and If There Were Why Would I Tell You.

If indeed the Iranians took over the guidance of the drone, why have they done this just once and then told everyone that’s what they did? Good grief, talk about a major competitive advantage. Why would you reveal this ever and especially over one event? It makes no sense. Even if they simply got lucky and captured the drone’s guidance system through chance, you would never reveal that stunning possibility.

Indeed, if the Queen of Tomorrow had figured out how to do this, She’d invent a different cover story. Maybe She’d smile about a turncoat in the US surveillance program hiding in the flu vaccine program. Maybe She’d do a major PR event showing the burning and shattered remains of the Satanic spy plane that was actually Mr. Ahmadinejad’s old Mercedes limo. Maybe She’d say nothing and let us listen to all the other voices. She, however, would not shout out, “I took your plane with my magic!” which is what the Iranians are doing.

The only reason you’d make this play is because you’ve got some Other Guys in mind. Consider the Iranian Local. The Arab Street knows about these high tech planes. They also know about destructive computer programs in form of those virus-rigged uranium centrifuges that blew up the Iranian nuclear program awhile back. All of the Iranian persuasion connects to that naïve level of knowledge and understanding. Hey, we’ve got computer engineers, too, and iGizmos, and hey, the government’s been shutting down communication networks of those crazy protesters. The Iranian story is not implausible to the Arab Street. And, even with those in Arab Spring, sticking it to the Great Satan is delightful even if at the hands of the masters those lovers of Springtime seek to overthrow.

Consider, too, the implications of this for domestic Iranian politics. It says that the government now has a new invisible hand of justice it can lay on anyone, including Americans, anytime. If you are pro-government, that moves you. If you are anti-government, it still moves you, just in a different direction.

Now think about different streets, the Main Streets of the West. Sure, it’s highly unlikely that the Iranians did what they say they did because Westerners tend to have a lot more experience with technology gone bad and have no doubt that a zillion dollar spy plane could suddenly lock up (the blue screen of death; embarassing reply to all; can you hear me now?). But, whatever the circumstances, we lost the plane and the Iranians have it and are holding press conferences at our expense and worst still our failure is setting up all their punch lines. We’re hearing bad echoes.

They even managed to provoke President Obama into asking for the plane to be returned in a manner like the parent of a kid who hit a ball into the mean neighbor’s porch. Can you imagine President Bush doing that? The contrast between Obama and Bush says a lot about how you do persuasion. While things were not good with Iran and Bush, the Iranians did not look for ways to taunt Mr. Bush like they do with Mr. Obama. Hey, they read the newspapers, too, and find our comparisons between Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama useful in their own way.

Thus, they can make persuasion plays that violate the Rules of Persuasion, yet are still successful. Sometimes you can pretend to be the Queen of Tomorrow Who knows all the Laws and get away with it.

It all depends on the Other Guys.