U.S. Special Forces Sent to Train Pakistanis

[abc_123]

Originally Posted by nmap

Sir, I perceive that I am deeply ignorant of some of the guiding principles and reasons behind OPSEC. Therefore, please understand that I am asking to learn.

If the opposing forces know the details, and if the events are historical and not current, why restrict the information? I recognize that some information about how things are done can never be released, and I guess there are sensitive issues that should not be discussed, but I speak now of the general case.

AM was simply pointing out that the bad guys have lots of eyes/ears. Even if the local eyes/ears missed it they KNOW somthing has changed when they start feeling the pain (in whatever form that "pain" is). So it's easy to start to put 2 and 2 togehter. So if it's "History" in the fact that is simply talking about somethign that the bad guys already KNOW.

I agree with AM. Probably not the most devistating release of information ever, BUT... There is no reason to release it. What if someone only SUSPECTED or THOUGHT.....What if this causes problems with Pakistani public opinion. What is the burning need to get this info to the media?

[JacobGL]

Is it possible that this particular release of information is working to help sustain the war effort? There are any number of politicians and talking heads who are screaming "this thing is over, we lost." Maybe someone wants to show that we have the capacity to change the playbook i.e. "put boots on the ground in PAK."

[greenberetTFS]

Originally Posted by uboat509

Just found this over at Small Wars Journal.



SFC W

SFC W,

They didn't send their names and pictures....... Maybe that's in the next issue,and address's so the Taliban can send them Xmas cards........

GB TFS

[nmap]

Originally Posted by abc_123

BUT... There is no reason to release it. What if someone only SUSPECTED or THOUGHT.....What if this causes problems with Pakistani public opinion. What is the burning need to get this info to the media?

I guess I can see several possibilities.

One is that the leak occurred as a matter of official policy for positive reasons - perhaps to generate support for the war, as JacobGL suggests, or maybe to create confusing information for some other reason. It might even be intended to reassure those who have expressed concern about Pakistan's nuclear arsenal.

The alternative is that someone leaked the information to gain a personal benefit of some sort without regard to greater issues. That could, of course, create all the problems you've suggested. If that is the case, then perhaps prosecution of the leaker should be pursued.

Although I can certainly understand concern for the troops and the mission, there is also a political dimension to the situation. Maybe news stories can improve public support for military initiatives. Therefore, perhaps the desire to provide information to the media springs from a goal of enhanced public relations. I suspect the public has a considerable appetite for such information, which helps explain the eagerness among the media to spread the story.

I'm sure you realize that the story of Special Forces soldiers going into a distant and dangerous area engages a great many people. It might be the key to attracting more recruits, if not to the SF, then to other branches. And, too, it could influence people to believe that the national leadership are addressing a dangerous situation.

Of course, if my views are in error, I always welcome correction.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by nmap

...Although I can certainly understand concern for the troops and the mission, there is also a political dimension to the situation. Maybe news stories can improve public support for military initiatives.....

nmap;

A mission is a process. From notification at home station, to getting ready/planning, deployment, execution in the host country, redeployment and cleanup write the AARs.

Depending on the mission OPSEC is stressed to the troops involved. You are told what you can say to even your family. You get in country and continue to do your best to maintain OPSEC and one morning you open up the local English copy of the local paper and there it is - the full layout of your mission. "Oh, crap!"

You are in a country where drive by shootings, riots and bombings happen all the time. The next time you pull out to go to a range Omar at the corner stall gives you a sullen glance.

At that point in time most of us could hardly care less about "news stories can improve public support for military initiatives...."

[nmap]

Thank you, Sir, for helping me understand.

The world experienced by Special Forces soldiers is so different from what I see that there is sometimes a gap (Grand Canyon sized) in my awareness.

[SF_BHT]

Originally Posted by nmap

Thank you, Sir, for helping me understand.

The world experienced by Special Forces soldiers is so different from what I see that there is sometimes a gap (Grand Canyon sized) in my awareness.

They do not understand that when we are on the ground there is nothing between us and the bad guys except our skills and methods. By the Politicians sitting in a nice office in DC playing Politics it endangers troops on the ground. Unless you have been there most people can not understand.

This is why I hate Politicians.......

[alright4u]

Richard and other QP's have stated the truth. The last thing any of us want is for our loved ones to find out where the hell we really are from any third party. I have never heard of/seen so many OPSEC breaches in my life since dumb ass Geraldo drew a sand table while being with a US unit south of Baghdad. This is sheer treason. Then the damn NYT tells the enemy how we track them. Shit, these used to be firing squad or hanging offenses.

I recall in early Jan 69 our CO at CCS telling us that Donald Duncan was in country looking to write about SOG. We were all told to stay away from him, as were the men at CCC and CCN. Well, I came back from the launch site one night with the FAC for a night at CCS. CPT Harrison pulled out a Newsweek or Time magazine. Sure enough the story was there about CCN, CCC,and CCS. It went on about SCU ( Special Commando Units), who were ranger like trained and led by SF. I doubt any SOG man said a word to Duncan. He probably got his damn info from a REMF in Nha Trang. I doubt any of the Delta guys said a damn word to his sad ass either. Yes, he wrote the New Legions in about 65 or so.

It fries my ass when men risk their lives to do the most dangerous missions, sign 20 plus year agreements to never talk about where they were, and; then some clown, who damn sure does have the balls to volunteer or even serve in in a real combat job runs his mouth.

I can tell you a true story. 1LT Harrigan's mother never knew where he died until she called me a few years back. He died with Shriver. That 86 year old lady was thrilled to talk to me and my top NCO in the company as we told her the truth about how good he was, what he did, and; how we considered him a true hero. What impressed her the most was talking to my top NCO in the company, who told her-" your son learned, wanted to learn to be the best, and; he listened to the SF NCO's. He became so good, that we NCO's trusted him to lead us anywhere." The same was true of Jerry Shriver's mother and his sister. We all told her the truth. She was relieved to hear the truth, and; she wrote me.

"We damn sure do not need more SF men killed because of OPSEC violations. "

Please tell these people who print this crap that you consider them traitors."

[afchic]

While I was in Legislative Affairs, I had to do a course sponsored by GWU in DC on Congressional Operations.

We had a speaker come in to talk to us about the media. He was a reporter for AP. I asked him how he slept at night knowing that he, and those like him put people like me, my husband and my son in harms way by printing things they sure as hell know they have no right printing, just so they could get a story in the paper.

He told me the citizen's "right to know" was more important than OPSEC, I pointed out that US citizens aren't the only ones reading the paper and the internet, and if he was so pompous and stupid, he could expect to see me with a gun in my hand, pointed at his head, if anything he personally wrote ever put one of my loved ones in harms way.

He almost had me thrown out. Luckily there were enough military folks in the class that they all seconded what I had to say, and the class was pretty much finished early because he walked out.

[nmap]

I had no idea how strong the feelings ran on this issue, although I suppose I should have known. As it's explained here, I begin to understand the viewpoint that OPSEC trumps other considerations. I get the impression that civilian and military perspectives are even more divergent than I had thought. I appreciate the opportunity to learn.

[alright4u]

Let me cover this right to know BS as I see it.

1. If I do not have a TSN security clearance, and; I am not in a TSN job, I do not have the right to know about any TSN program period. When I had a TSN, I knew only about our nuclear capiblity- not any others. 2.

2.Security clearances that are basic to one's job entitles one the right to know only what he/she needs to know to do the job.

3.Show me any reporter with a TS or TS plus clearance with a right to know. This right to know BS is a flawed argument.

[ACE844]

I think former VP Cheney's statements in regards to this issue today in his televised speech were well said and in line with what the QP's here are saying. I only wish the current leadership had their views more in line with not handicapping the folks whose mission and duty is to keep us safe.

I'd rather give you folks free reign to do your job and what you're good at and never know the result and not suffer any future attacks or incident than have some LA Times or NYT reporter trying to justify his parasitic existence and salary by putting all of you in further danger. It seems the only thing our enemies understand and respect is overwhelming violence of action and force. I would like all of you to have the opportunity to 'take them to school.' Just my outsiders $.02

[MARSOC0211]

The actual clause used is NEED to KNOW, so that “right to know” is total BS. That is why there are caveats within the clearance system. The general public, and all of us for that matter, do not have the “right to know” everything. Just be content with the fact someone somewhere is risking their life IOT ensure the safety, security, and general well being of our beloved country.

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by ACE844

I think former VP Cheney's statements in regards to this issue today in his televised speech were well said and in line with what the QP's here are saying. I only wish the current leadership had their views more in line with not handicapping the folks whose mission and duty is to keep us safe.

I'd rather give you folks free reign to do your job and what you're good at and never know the result and not suffer any future attacks or incident than have some LA Times or NYT reporter trying to justify his parasitic existence and salary by putting all of you in further danger. It seems the only thing our enemies understand and respect is overwhelming violence of action and force. I would like all of you to have the opportunity to 'take them to school.' Just my outsiders $.02

Concur.

If the D-Day invasion was taking place today, the NYT would provide, in advance, the date, time, location, units, and all relevant details in a special German language edition, then print an inside story afterwards on how the military botched the operation.

TR

[Sigaba]

My two cents are that the civilians' 'right to know' is covered by the fact that the armed services answer to civilian authorities that are ultimately answerable to voting civilians.

What ever value the fourth estate adds to the process of informing the citizenry was compromised long ago when getting the story right and reporting it correctly took a back seat to getting the story out first-- propriety and accuracy be damned.