Ross A. Finlayson, <firstname.lastname@example.org>, writes:
> Consider this hypothetical situation: group A and group B have a dispute.
> After the fact, group A is dead, while at some point when they more alive
> group B was armed with armored tanks and automatic weapons and was in
> the state of assaulting group A. The consistency of group A was a set
> of civilians and group B military.
> Later some people who are still alive decide to have a simulation and
> see what they can determine about the facts as they occurred. Group B
> runs all aspects of the simulation without oversight, where group B's
> goal is to show certain things. What conclusions do you expect to be
> apparent from group B's simulation?
Don't forget, the plaintiffs (Waco survivors and heirs) have lawyers
as well. The test was originally proposed by the plaintiffs and the
terms were agreed to by them. I believe they also agreed upon the firm
to conduct the analysis (unfortunately I suspect the only organizations
with experience in this kind of analysis have military or law enforcement
ties because those groups are the main users of this technology).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:11:22 MDT