<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Promise and Peril of Constructivist Strategy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://redteamjournal.com/2009/07/constructivist/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://redteamjournal.com/2009/07/constructivist/</link>
	<description>Red teaming and alternative analysis for national security and business advantage.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 20:32:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Adam Elkus</title>
		<link>http://redteamjournal.com/2009/07/constructivist/comment-page-1/#comment-1014</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam Elkus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2009 17:04:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redteamjournal.com/?p=1696#comment-1014</guid>
		<description>No prob. It was a good post and a good lead-up to our next move.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No prob. It was a good post and a good lead-up to our next move.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Pampinella</title>
		<link>http://redteamjournal.com/2009/07/constructivist/comment-page-1/#comment-1006</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Pampinella</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2009 19:02:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redteamjournal.com/?p=1696#comment-1006</guid>
		<description>Adam,

Thanks for the link and post,hadn&#039;t seen this yet since we&#039;ve both been preoccupied with related issues...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Adam,</p>
<p>Thanks for the link and post,hadn&#8217;t seen this yet since we&#8217;ve both been preoccupied with related issues&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam Elkus</title>
		<link>http://redteamjournal.com/2009/07/constructivist/comment-page-1/#comment-969</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam Elkus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 16:06:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redteamjournal.com/?p=1696#comment-969</guid>
		<description>Yes, but I&#039;m talking about his own specific brand of it. Not that the brand is terribly different, but Pampinella evaluates the constructivist theory by comparing it to Kilcullen&#039;s writings. Hence the usage when I paraphrase Pampinella.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, but I&#8217;m talking about his own specific brand of it. Not that the brand is terribly different, but Pampinella evaluates the constructivist theory by comparing it to Kilcullen&#8217;s writings. Hence the usage when I paraphrase Pampinella.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Flash</title>
		<link>http://redteamjournal.com/2009/07/constructivist/comment-page-1/#comment-967</link>
		<dc:creator>Flash</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 09:10:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://redteamjournal.com/?p=1696#comment-967</guid>
		<description>How is that &quot;David Kilcullen&#039;s&quot; COIN theory? It is decades old COIN theory that David Kilcullen wrote about.  The guy is smart and impressive, but pop-centric COIN wasn&#039;t his creation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How is that &#8220;David Kilcullen&#8217;s&#8221; COIN theory? It is decades old COIN theory that David Kilcullen wrote about.  The guy is smart and impressive, but pop-centric COIN wasn&#8217;t his creation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.395 seconds -->
