Yeah - what he said. You have to consider the dynamics of the region, which are very dynamic. Like the fear dynamic, which is lost on a train. Moving forward. Real fast.

...through the dynamics of that dynamic region. (Now with multiple multi-dimensional dynamic updates - see below.)

My post on Tom Donilon's dynamic multidimensional lenses was unfair to the man who used the term to describe planning for the Libya op. (In response to DNI Clapper's assessment that the civil war in Libya would be a lengthy stalemate that Qaddafi would ultimately win - back before we got involved in the civil war in Libya, or even acknowledged, except here, by accident - it was a civil war.) Unfair because "National Security Adviser" Tom Donilon clarified his remarks later in the briefing, with some help from his deputy (for "strategic communication") Ben Rhodes, and I left that part out.

So in all fairness and without further ado...

Q Thank you very much. First of all, is the President happy with an intelligence chief who conducts static and one-dimensional analysis? And secondly, you say that this does not take into -- General Clapper's assessment doesn't take into account steps taken with the opposition. I mean, does that mean military steps? Because his analysis would suggest -- and the military dimension is clearly very important when you're clinging onto power -- that they need something to tip the balance. Thank you.

MR. DONILON: On the first question, the President is very happy with the performance of General Clapper and we work together every single day. I was asked a question about the statement, and I think my judgment on the statement is a static analysis and that you need to take into account the dynamics.

On working with the opposition as part of the dynamics analysis, what I said is that it doesn't take into account, kind of looking to the future in the increasing work that the international community is doing with the opposition, beginning now with political support, humanitarian support, and deepening those conversations. I think that's the best answer for that.

MR. RHODES: Yes, and I'd just echo one point that Tom made earlier, which is that if you look at the trajectory of our own efforts with the international community in terms of a steady ramping up of our sanctions, in terms of the introduction of accountability measures, in terms of the provision assistance, and in terms of the consideration of a range of military options, some of which are already in train, those are obviously going to affect the dynamic within Libya.

Similarly, if you look at the trajectory in the region, as Tom said, change has been the order of the day. And I think that any assessment of the situation right now would suggest that history is not on the side of Muammar Qaddafi. History is on the side of the Libyan people, and they're going to be the ones who determine their future.

And so we are very clear in having a policy that recognizes that history is on the side of the Libyan people, and that those who are around Qaddafi, as they make their own calculations, must understand that dynamic within their country and understand that they'll be held accountable if they continue to side with the regime that, again, has been brutalizing its own people.

MR. VIETOR: I think we have time for one last question so this will be our final question.

Q Thank you so much. Getting back to the static analysis, a couple of things. Why would the administration present a static one-dimensional assessment to Congress and the world about something this critical? It seems to me that that undercuts, first of all, the obligation to inform Congress fully, and to present a coherent picture of your assessment to the world. I mean, if Qaddafi is not entrenched and is going -- is not going to succeed, as General Clapper suggested today, said today, then don't you think that that is basically presenting a false intelligence assessment to the public -- intelligence assessment.

Secondly, if you wait for an international consensus -- which is unlikely to come at the U.N. and, therefore, not to come at NATO -- aren't you increasing the likelihood that your pressure, squeezing him through sanctions and other means will not dislodge him?

MR. DONILON: Andrea, on the first question, again, I think that General Clapper was presenting a kind of a flat-out resources analysis in terms of the regime. And he went through -- if you look at the transcript -- he went through the kind of equipment and resources that the regime has. And I think if you look at it, he said from a standpoint of attrition, if you do an attrition analysis, you get to his conclusion.

I'm talking about looking to the future here, and talking about taking into account various dynamics that I think are in train and could be in train going forward. So, again, if you had sat here and you and I had this conversation 45 days ago, and I had said, my analysis is that Qaddafi would lose half his country by March 10th, we would have said just based on capabilities and numerical arithmetic analysis, that that's highly unlikely.

But the dynamics in the region are just more dynamic -- are just moving faster than that. And there are things underway here across the region that have presented us with circumstances that a year ago, let's say, would not have come to the fore in a conversation that you and I might be having. And I think you'd agree with that, that the changed dynamics in the region have been of a historic nature.

And what's happened, of course, is that people, especially young people -- and it varies from country to country -- have confronted regimes that are not performing for them or that have been repressing them and the fear dynamic has been lost. And when the fear dynamic is lost, the overwhelming force analysis changes pretty dramatically. And we've seen that across the region over the last couple of months.

So that's my response to that. If you ask -- if you just do an intelligence assessment of assets, as I said, a unidimensional assessment of assets, you come to a pretty clear -- you come to a set of conclusions. But I do think it's important -- and we have been obviously closely following these dynamics across the region -- that, in fact, these outcomes are not at all preordained, and there can be, as we talked about in response to an earlier question, there can also be other events and dynamics that intervene.

Now, I went on so long I forgot the second part of your question.

What's all that studying the dynamic train stuff mean? It sounds like he's saying there are known unknowns and unknown unknowns (and stuff we know and you don't) ~ but to me it's an unknown unknown. Your guess is as good as mine.

Maybe this:

But this comes to mind, too.

Add your own captions about studying history and seeing the future. (And in that laugh I see nothing but sympathy.)

Update: Chugga chugga choo choo, Mr Assad. That sound you hear is the dynamic fear train of history comin' - and when it gets there you better be on the right side of the tracks.

And more dynamics: Arab League to ask UN for imposing no-fly zone over Gaza "to protect the civilians against Israeli air strikes." You know, like the one they wanted over Libya... (will they provide the planes to enforce this one?)

In a statement issued after an emergency meeting of the pan- Arab organization at the permanent delegates' level in its Cairo headquarter, the AL said it would ask the United Nation Security Council to convene an emergency meeting to discuss the Israeli aggression over Gaza to lift the siege and impose a no-fly zone against the Israeli military to protect civilians.

The statement rejected the double standard policies towards the Palestinian case, urging the UN Security Council and the Quartet committee to bear all responsibilities for halting the subsequent massacres and provide an international protection for the unarmed citizens.

Speaking of Cairo, didja know one of the reasons the anti-government street protests were ongoing there is because...

Over one million Egyptian protesters in Cairo's Liberation square have demanded their military rulers to abandon Israel and lift the blockade on the besieged Gaza strip. Protesters voiced their anger at Tel Aviv by burning the Israeli flag and demanding the Liberation of Palestine, a Press TV correspondent said.

They promised to stand by Gazans, who have been suffering Israeli attacks and its four-year long crippling siege. Many protesters headed toward the US Embassy from Liberation Square to protest Israel's deadly attacks on Gaza. The Israeli flag was torn to pieces, when protesters tried to raise Palestinian flag above the Israeli embassy.

The development comes two months after a historic revolution ousted President Hosni Mubarak.

Or didja even know the protests were ongoing?

But have no fear (and loathing) ~ just remember, when the weird turn pro, you better get going. Or something like that.

(Damn, the train to the future moves fast, doesn't it?)

Next stop?