Professional Soldiers ® - Please Don'T Run

Professional Soldiers ® (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/index.php)

- The Soapbox (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=93)

- - Please Don'T Run (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9998)

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Which one of these guys (to include McCain) is the conservative Republican?:munchin

TR

You suppose we are not going to have a "conservative Republican" on the ticket?

Quote:

Originally Posted by CPTAUSRET

:(

You suppose we are not going to have a "conservative Republican" on the ticket?

Not if any of those mentioned (outside Condi) are on the top of the ticket.

They may put a token on as the VP, just to appease the party faithful.

TR

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubberneck

Huckabee from Arkansas is a candidate I would like to see run.

No offense, but Huckabee is a buffoon, and comes from a clan of inbred cranks. Every man, woman and child in the state of Arkansas has their own favorite set of Huckabee stories.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tcharles

National Review has speculated Mit Romney or George Allen with Rudy Guilliani as VP. They tend to have a finger on the pulse of the RNC. I think that is a very solid ticket, however, I support a Michael Savage lead ticket.

+1 on Savage:p

RE: Weiner

His heart is in the right place, but he is a media figure. Not a leader of the people. I think he would be a good consultant, for his passion, but not a good decision maker.

Did you hear his program today, he had a guest on saying that the dims are going to revive efforts to silence him and other Talk Radio hosts that don't spew the socialist drivel that is supposed to pass as news.

The Article

If this is completely true it is worrisome to say the least. Then there's this story,OPSEC or Censorship?

These events are unsettling, at least for me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NG_M4_Shooter

Then there's this story,OPSEC or Censorship?

If I am reading that correctly, it would seem to prohibit almost all posts on this forum by current soldiers, without the prior consent of their CO. The source doc is available, so I'll have to check it to see if Wired is using some hyperbole. :eek:

Edited to add: Section 2-1c concerns disclosure of "critical and sensitive" information on the Web. Section 2-1g contains the language requiring an OPSEC review prior to posting or emailing such information.

This begs the question as to what "critical and sensitive" means. The examples contained in the text are clear enough, but there have been other instances where much more innocuous information has been placed in these categories by the Army. They seem to be overly broad.

Gear reviews, pipeline discussions, body armor debates, survival and medical tips, where are we to draw the line? The rules about TTPs and current operations are one thing, but this would seem to be another.

Yeah, I shoulda put that in a separate thread...

Will a mod please merge these posts with the new OPSEC thread?