Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst
I failed to make myself clear.
Would you not agree that the only way we keep the enemy from learning our means and methods is by keeping our means and methods secret?
Concerning the satphone incident in particular.....
Of course nobody can say anything hypothetical with "absolute" certainty. If we want absolute certainty we must avoid all human endeavors at all cost.
|
I would agree that it is impossible to keep our means and methods secret until the enemy is beaten. As they (Franks?) so often said, the enemy gets a vote. The enemy will adjust.
I'm not saying publicize everything we plan, but we go into it knowing that the enemy will adjust, and it may not matter if he does because we've chosen the right means and methods.
Quote:
Bin Laden's group now uses couriers for communication. Also, Bin Laden once used natural backdrops -- a rock formation, a village. Analysis used those backdrops to locate Bin Laden. Congressmen disclosed that bit, too. Almost immediately all backdrops were cloth or a wall.
Would you argue that we would be more or less confident where Bin Laden might be located if the satphone incident and the backdrop incedents had NOT been revealed?
B
|
I would argue that 1)the satphone+backdrops were not successful in capturing or killing him, and that 2)we have compromised the effectiveness of OBL's communications.
I do think it was stupid to publicize the satphone thing, but it's not the end of the world. I don't think it should've been redacted from documents, or used to kill cases before federal courts, as the Nat'l Security issue has been used and abused by the administration.