Wednesday, May 02, 2007
|
|
The Army's Big Blunder
|
|
Posted by:
Hugh Hewitt at
4:29 PM
|
|
The Pentagon has issued new regulations effectively shutting down all active duty military blogs.
I find this decision to be so amazingly ill-informed about how the milblogs have served the war effort and the cause of the military as to raise real doubts about the military's ability to ever get ahead of the enemy in the information war. Really, if such a blunder can happen without anyone even asking about the ill effects on the effort to keep information flowing from people in the know to combat the ceaseless propaganda from the enemy, then the brass involved cannot possibly understand how the information war is playing out.
Another story:
The new rules (.pdf) obtained by Wired News require a commander be consulted before every blog update.
"This is the final nail in the coffin for combat blogging," said retired paratrooper Matthew Burden, editor of The Blog of War anthology. "No more military bloggers writing about their experiences in the combat zone. This is the best PR the military has -- it's most honest voice out of the war zone. And it's being silenced."
Compare the Army's fear of information flows with the jihadists deep investment in them by reading Lawrence Wright's "The Terror Web."
"The Internet provides confused young Muslims in Europe with a virtual community," Wright wrote. "Those who cannot adapt to their new homes discover on the Internet a responsive and compassionate forum. 'The Internet stands in for the idea of the ummah, the mythologized Muslim community,' Marc Sageman, the psychiatrist and former C.I.A. officer, said. 'The Internet makes this ideal community concrete, because one can interact with it.' He compares this virtual ummah to romantic conceptions of nationhood, which inspire people not only to love their country but to die for it."
The internet has also fostered many virtual communities of individuals who believe in freedom, religious tolerance, and victory in the war against the jihaidsts. Many of the participants in those communities are milbloggers, and much crucial information on and perspective about the war has come from the milbloggers. The Army has now concluded that those flows do more harm than good, but I cannot fathom how any serious student of the blogosphere could reach such a conclusion.
More at Blackfive. Matt correctly notes that "Operational Security is of paramount importance."
"But," he adds, "we are losing the Information War on all fronts. Fanatic-like adherence to OPSEC will do us little good if we lose the few honest voices that tell the truth about The Long War."
UPDATE: More from The Asylum and Instapundit.
|
|
Who is in command over at the Pentagon?
Who is the Executive in charge of the entirety of the Executive Branch?
No.
We can't delude ourselves that it was just another bureaucratic foul-up, just like the Dubai Ports deal.
We have to stop deluding ourselves that this administration is really in the saddle.
As soon as possible, we have to put Bush, and his whole family and their groupies behind us. They're simply killing us.
I blame HIM, him personally.
I don't absolve him of anything.
|
|
Hugh, its an AR, not a DoD directive. To those of us who know the difference its a huge difference. Standalone AR's have no weight on other services. I don't know for sure, but I would venture to guess that CentCom and/or MNCI have the authority to countermand and AR for subordinate commands.
It is awful PR but, its the Army High Command, after more than a hundred years of experience creating peculiarly stupid reg's they have it down to an artisan science. |
|
I've completely lost confidence in this administration, and their ability to manage anything.
I wouldn't trust them to get right a 3d rate, Chinese fire drill.
This decision isn't aberrational.
It's THEMATIC with this group.
The media is ripping this war apart, and outside of talk radio, {which is staring down the muzzle of the fairness doctrine coming back...} the ONLY forum where the military can get across the minor successes that have heretofore been realized is in the military blogosphere.
AND YET, ............................. AND YET, ............................... THIS sad group of junior varsity types is shutting them down, AND SHUTTING THEM DOWN when the political millstone is grinding down all those that oppose surrender.
This decision is despicable.
And it's brain-dead.
And it's EXACTLY what we've all come to know and expect from this group.
This is just like retaining Tenet.
This is just like allowing the Europeans to dictate the play with the Iranians.
This is just like Meirs.
Just like the Dubai Ports deal.
And we could go on, and on, and on.
|
|
|
|
While the milblogs are an exceptionally good resource for news, my own personal concern is the brass putting the kaibosh on e-mail...I have a son and a grandson in country who communicate frequently, which is a great comfort. Now, with the ban on e-mail, families all over the country will have to wait on pins and needles for word from their loved ones.
While I love our military, this is a stupid, stupid move on their part. They (the brass) need to rethink this now!
RC |
|
|
Let us not forget, the current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is the same bonehead whose bungling in Iraq cost the lives of both Americans and Iraqis implementing a failed strategy that had us losing the war. Something assinine like this from an administration that rewards incompetence with promotion is not surprising. |
|
Ironically, the Fighting 6 Marines were asked on 4/28 about how they feel about their military blog. This was their response:
"A blog has let us be very proactive and interactive with our audience in a way not done before. Already we have been introduced to some great people who have helped us tremendously. I won't plug Blair any more but suffice to say he has contributed directly to the accomplishment of our slice of the mission pie.
Two years ago this might not have been feasible. Vox wasn't around, of course, to make integration of video, photos and audio so easy. We are also blessed with a very blog-friendly big-boss public affairs officer who has given this site his blessing. Blessings or no, however, this blog is meaningless without you: the audience. We know the American public is hungry for the military side of the story that isn't filtered through the media. You get direct contact with the troops through us. I get the impression that we've got a wide array of political opinions among our readership. I hope that, whatever your political persuasion, we have given you food for thought from a perspective maybe you haven't been exposed to before."
http://fightin6thmarines.vox.com/
|
|
OK, here's what the link says to which Hugh linked:
"The regulation says that a Soldier or other U.S. Army personnel must consult with their immediate supervisor and OPSEC officer prior to posting information in a public forum. However, this is where unit commander or organization leadership specifies in orders, policies, or directives how this will be done. Some units may require that Soldiers register their blog with the unit for identification purposes with occasional spot checks after an initial review. Other units may require a review before every posting."
Looks like it will be up to each individual unit commander how to handle the blogs. It also suggests that there could possibly be checks of blogs initially then ultimately the blog is left alone. Am I missing something? How much damage is done here will depend on individual commanders?? |
|
|
The Leftinistra will stop at NOTHING to squelch Freedom of Speech. |
|
MKH and Hugh have hit on a major issue. You win the information war by being more honest and more ingenious than the enemy, and apparently our military is neither. Col. Yingling's discussion of the failure of generalship in Iraq seems more and more on target. In war, the dumb guys lose, and we're looking dumber and dumber.
steve maloney
ambridge, pa |
|
|
Can you interview someone from the Pentagon about this? |
|
What if an operation against Iran were in the planning stages? Would you, nonetheless, object? |
|
|
|