I posted facts, not opinion. I criticise the cretin you stupidly elected, and his stunts are about to impact you, bigly, right where it hurts; in your pocket.The brain-dead, senile moron was Biden, and your opinion means nothing to me, all I have ever seen you do is criticize everything the US does. Go kick rocks.
I really struck a nerve!Government spending is not a key to real growth. And post Covid, the economy has nowhere to go but up. You draw infantile, weak conclusions because you don't know how do anything but drive by comments. Get over yourself.
Right, so Waltz is so competent, so security oriented that he didn't invite a journalist onto a supposedly secure chat involving secret war plans. Thanks for putting me straight.Nope, you got it wrong.
"Confused or limited brain cells"? Liberals didn't elect Trump; Trump's beloved "poorly educated" did, and are now looking forward to a global trade war, soaring prices, recession and escalating inflation. Don't forget, tariffs work both ways; 20% on imports means you'll be paying 20% more for those imports. US-made alternatives? Good luck finding any.Musk is too flamboyant and inflammable.
Mark Kelly is not a traitor.
Leftists might be citizens with confused or limited brain cells.
But it makes no sense to call them evil.
Are politically depressed and leaderless Leftists evil?
There was a steady drip-feed of misinformation (Operation Fortitude),That test was not an OOB.
Again, that text was not an order of battle. It made no statement of details of who, where from or to where.
If anything, the announcement by the Pentagon of the three carrier groups moving into the middle east two weeks earlier was closer to an OOB that what existed in that text.
And OOB is a detailed list of the command structure and units involved in a military engagement. The Pentagon announcing the movement of three carrier groups to the middle east to deal with the Houthi Threat is still not an OOB, but it is closer to an OOB than that text. That text is in no way an OOB.
Another problem with your argument is that the level of OOB release like the Pentagon has done happens all the time, and it is done mainly to strike the fear of God or Allah in the enemy, because there is pretty much no military on the planet that can do anything with a US OOB, all that the OOB could possibly impart on the enemy is a rough estimate of how truly ****ed they are.
In modern warfare, "three US carrier groups" equates to "absolutely ****ed".
Pete Hegseth as Sec Def has delegated classification authority from the President. He has the power to declassify within his department. The president can rescind that, or declare that the Sec Def exceeded his authority, but he didn't do that.
This was a spillage of sensitive, but not highly classified information. It wasn't intentional and it had no actionable material that could have been used by America's enemies, except to tell them how much time they had to get right with Allah, unless you are ready to classify Jeffrey Goldberg as an enemy of the United States, and it didn't impact the mission.
But again, the Houthi best by date was stamped the moment that the Pentagon made that "three US carrier groups" announcement.
It wasn't an OOB, and there are times where releasing war plans, even to the enemy, is a sound and winning strategy.
A good case in point: Operation Garbo in WWII
In the hours before the D-Day landing Allied Intelligence released the Normandy landing details through a spy, codenamed Garbo, to the German high command.
They did this knowing that the information would not adversely impact the Normandy landing immediately and giving the Germans this information would solidify the German high command's trust in Garbo. Having gained their trust, Garbo then, for the next week, started feeding the Germans false alerts that a bigger, main invasion force was heading to Calais, which had the effect of freezing 3 Panzer divisions and 30,000 German troops in Calais, saving the Normandy landing.
So see? Your last statement was grossly over simplified, and your understanding of what constitutes an OOB is absurdly wrong.
How do you know it wasn't classified; because the incompetent idiots leaking it told you it wasn't? Of course they'll say anything to cover their useless arses.And it's still minor.
That is absolutely known.
The information wasn't classified no matter how many times you say it was.
If someone wants transparency they should start by not losing their mind and calling for heads for ginned up and overblown offenses and holding their own accountable for offenses that actually result in tragedy. Just a thought.
When Benghazi and the Afghanistan **** ups can be swept under the rug, the Democrats were already at rock bottom.
How do you know it wasn't classified; because the incompetent idiots leaking it told you it wasn't? Of course they'll say anything to cover their useless arses.
There was a steady drip-feed of misinformation (Operation Fortitude),
fed to Nazi Germany prior to D-Day which went on for months; the assumption that Calais, being the closest French port to the British mainland, would host the invasion was accepted by the Nazi leadership way before D-Day.
Operation Fortitude: The D-Day Misfit Spies
Operation Fortitude: The D-Day Misfit Spiesspyscape.com
I doubt he personally set up the group chat.Right, so Waltz is so competent, so security oriented that he didn't invite a journalist onto a supposedly secure chat involving secret war plans. Thanks for putting me straight.
It doesn't matter who set it up; it was Waltz who invited Goldberg.I doubt he personally set up the group chat.
Dunno. I was just a grunt, but I would assume that assets, time of departure, and time on target would be classified.People who work or worked in highly classified DOD jobs know. We are, were trained on it annually. The text wasn't a war plan, it wasn't an attack plan, and it wasn't an OOB.
The text could be considered sensitive, but not classified.
Also, the SecDef has delegated classification authority for information within the DOD, and the only position that can overrule his decision on classified material would be the POTUS. So even if he release classified information it would fall on the POTUS to determine that the SecDef overstepped his authority in releasing it, and the POTUS didn't.
It wasn't an attack plan? So discussing what, where and when specified munitions were to be used against specific targets in Yemen wasn't an attack plan? What was it then; a coded lunch invitation?People who work or worked in highly classified DOD jobs know. We are, were trained on it annually. The text wasn't a war plan, it wasn't an attack plan, and it wasn't an OOB.
The text could be considered sensitive, but not classified.
Also, the SecDef has delegated classification authority for information within the DOD, and the only position that can overrule his decision on classified material would be the POTUS. So even if he release classified information it would fall on the POTUS to determine that the SecDef overstepped his authority in releasing it, and the POTUS didn't.
People who work or worked in highly classified DOD jobs know. We are, were trained on it annually. The text wasn't a war plan, it wasn't an attack plan, and it wasn't an OOB.
The text could be considered sensitive, but not classified.
Also, the SecDef has delegated classification authority for information within the DOD, and the only position that can overrule his decision on classified material would be the POTUS. So even if he release classified information it would fall on the POTUS to determine that the SecDef overstepped his authority in releasing it, and the POTUS didn't.
Stop gaslighting. There is NO QUESTION that the chat contained classified information, and that includes the political discussions. Hegseth clearly copied operational details from the high side to a commercial communication network.People who work or worked in highly classified DOD jobs know. We are, were trained on it annually.
What the f***?Also, the SecDef has delegated classification authority for information within the DOD....
Not at all. Your comments are uninformed, as usual.I really struck a nerve!
Doubtful. Like most of the things you post.I posted facts, not opinion. I criticise the cretin you stupidly elected, and his stunts are about to impact you, bigly, right where it hurts; in your pocket.
Doubtful. Like most of the things you post.
The MSN isn't much of a source and economics isn't a smell.
Okay.The MSN isn't much of a source and economics isn't a smell.
Im pretty sure you cant just declassify things by ****ing up and saying it out loud, even if you are the authority.I worked for years in highly classified DOD environments, and know people directly involved in the effort that was being discussed.
I've not asked (because it would put them in a hard spot), but based on having worked similar missions in the past, the information put into the Signal Chat would probably be treated as TS//NF within DOD channels, although we almost certainly probably produced a number of REL tearlines for particular partners.
However:
This is correct. If SECDEF decides he wants to put TS//NF DOD information into Signal... he has the authority to do that, unless overriden by POTUS, and, in fact, SECDEF can decide in the moment to make it no longer TS//NF to do so (he's the OCA).
It was stupid for him to do it. It was wrong of him to do it. But he had the authority to do it.
I wonder, if this stuff isn't classified or sensitive, then why didn't Hegseth post this information on his X account? After all, it would be too late for the Houthis to take any action, right?Im pretty sure you cant just declassify things by ****ing up and saying it out loud, even if you are the authority.
Dunno. I was just a grunt, but I would assume that assets, time of departure, and time on target would be classified.
Stop gaslighting. There is NO QUESTION that the chat contained classified information, and that includes the political discussions. Hegseth clearly copied operational details from the high side to a commercial communication network.
I worked for years in highly classified DOD environments, and know people directly involved in the effort that was being discussed.
I've not asked (because it would put them in a hard spot), but based on having worked similar missions in the past, the information put into the Signal Chat would probably be treated as TS//NF within DOD channels, although we almost certainly probably produced a number of REL tearlines for particular partners.
This is correct. If SECDEF decides he wants to put TS//NF DOD information into Signal... he has the authority to do that, unless overriden by POTUS, and, in fact, SECDEF can decide in the moment to make it no longer TS//NF to do so (he's the OCA).
It was stupid for him to do it. It was wrong of him to do it. But he had the authority to do it.
Im pretty sure you cant just declassify things by ****ing up and saying it out loud, even if you are the authority.
I mean, if that were true, seems like you would have mentioned that the Secretary of State, being a cabinet level official, has the authority to classify and declassify things too. But I cant remember that argument ever advanced by you or anyone during all the bitching about Hillary Clinton's emails.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?