Author Topic: Presidents Need to Visit the Troops  (Read 7528 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 223,480
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,335
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Presidents Need to Visit the Troops
« Reply #50 on: December 28, 2018, 08:40:02 »
#1: Good on the President and the First Lady travelling to see the troops.  Like some others, while I may not be a fan on many of POTUS 45’s actions, good to see him visit the troops...and good on Melania as well.  She mights not have been the most enthusiastic visitor to the AO, but she was there.  To be honest, while PMJT visited Mali, going to Africa and seeing the children of the Region would have been something I would have thought would be right up Sophie Gregoire-Trudeau’s singing.....’idiom...’

#2: OPSEC - well...in this day and age, is it really an operations security contravention to know that Force elements you’d expect to be in an AO are known to be in an AO by statements (yes, tweets, but could be considered as statements nonetheless) if not specifically tied to an operation (not the big ‘OP SOMETHING’ named
op, but an op op)?  Would we also be up in arms in the POTUS were toswing NorthEast to AFG and tweeted a picture of him with some ST5 or ST6 bubbas at Bagram?  So, shock and surprise that non-conventional forces are operating out of Al Asan? Al Ain? Al Udeid? Khandahar? Solerno? Bagram? etc.? 

:2c:

Regards
G2G

Online Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 98,570
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,160
Re: Presidents Need to Visit the Troops
« Reply #51 on: December 28, 2018, 08:43:46 »
I was going to add that I am sure SEALS and other Special Operators are deployed almost everywhere US forces are deployed.

Just Google SEALS/Trump and you will find pages of MSN going nuts.

Quote
no, those reports and criticisms go back a bit

Yes, the WP, a paper bought by Amazon owner to slam Trump and the Republicans. The US MSN is insane with TDS.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 08:47:22 by Rifleman62 »
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 305,841
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,198
Re: Presidents Need to Visit the Troops
« Reply #52 on: December 28, 2018, 09:01:12 »
Good article on the use of the word covert.

Quote
No, Trump Didn’t Reveal A ‘Covert’ Navy SEAL Team In Iraq

“Covert” has a very specific definition under Title 50 of the United States Code, which makes it a matter of intelligence authority, focused primarily on the activities of state organs like the Central Intelligence Agency (with some input from the DoD); this is a direct contrast to Title 10 of the USC, which deals solely with military authority. Title 10 “is used colloquially to refer to DoD and military operations,” as the Harvard National Security Journal puts it, while Title 50 “refers to intelligence agencies, intelligence activities, and covert action.”

While the two authorities detailed under Titles 10 and 50 aren’t mutually exclusive, forces operating under Title 10 are explicitly prohibited from carrying out covert operations, instead relegated to clandestine activities which involve “the tactical concealment of the activity” and don’t require an explicit notification of Congress, according to an April 2018 Congressional Research Service report.

“By comparison, covert activities can be characterized as the strategic concealment of the United States’ sponsorship of activities that aim to effect change in the political, economic, military, or diplomatic behavior of an overseas target.”

As it stands, the vast majority missions carried out by U.S. special operations forces are non-statutory clandestine operations under Title 10 rather than explicitly (and legally) covert operations under Title 50; OPSEC, in the case of the former, is usually designed to conceal an operation for tactical purposes rather than fully embrace the level of plausible deniability usually referred to spies. In this context, the only true “covert” operation carried out by U.S. special operations forces was the SEAL Team 6 raid on Osama Bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, in 2011.

Simply belonging to a SEAL Team doesn’t make your every move “covert,” especially if you’re hanging out in the DFAC during the commander-in-chief’s visit.

https://taskandpurpose.com/trump-reveals-navy-seals-iraq/


Pretty lame picture if you ask me. NVGs, chest rigs, ammo, no guns? Inside a DFAC? Can't get much more dog and pony than that. Maybe some of them should have had scuba tanks and flippers on  ;D


As for opsec local workers and employees aren't stupid. They can tell the difference between an Airforce security force dude and a special operations dude. A few minutes of parading these guys around base all kitted up in sight of locals (ie KBR kitchen staff) and the cats out of the bag for sure.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 122,345
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,635
Re: Presidents Need to Visit the Troops
« Reply #53 on: December 28, 2018, 09:03:36 »
I was going to add that I am sure SEALS and other Special Operators are deployed almost everywhere US forces are deployed.

Just Google SEALS/Trump and you will find pages of MSN going nuts.

Yes, the WP, a paper bought by Amazon owner to slam Trump and the Republicans. The US MSN is insane with TDS.

Sure, but it still backs my point that media coverage started well before Dec 26th which is what you stated.  It wasn't just the WP.  I provided two links and can provide more if you like. 

like this one dated way back in October by the military times:  https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2018/10/17/top-senate-democrat-urges-trump-to-visit-troops-fighting-overseas/

Here is their media bias in case you were wondering...  https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/military-times/

But you wanted to know what I meant so I provided the context for my comment.  We'll never know but I am sure the negative press in and around thanksgiving over his not visiting the troops since taking office (over 2 years) was a factor.

Good for him.  I applaud it and support it even though it took longer than it should have.  If you read my post you'll see that I agree that the media is trying what they can to paint it in a bad light despite it being the right thing to do.
Optio

Online Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 98,570
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,160
Re: Presidents Need to Visit the Troops
« Reply #54 on: December 28, 2018, 09:15:51 »
Quote
We'll never know but I am sure the negative press in and around thanksgiving over his not visiting the troops since taking office (over 2 years) was a factor.

I believe you mean not visiting the troops in a Combat Zone since taking office. Trump has visiting the troops many times since taking office. He visited a USCG station Thanksgiving, 22 Nov 18. One of several visits to the USCG since taking office, let alone visiting the other branches.
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 122,345
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,635
Re: Presidents Need to Visit the Troops
« Reply #55 on: December 28, 2018, 09:19:53 »
I believe you mean not visiting the troops in a Combat Zone since taking office. Trump has visiting the troops many times since taking office. He visited a USCG station Thanksgiving, 22 Nov 18. One of several visits to the USCG since taking office, let alone visiting the other branches.

Sure.  But you and I and most people both know what we are talking about here.
Optio

Online Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 98,570
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,160
Re: Presidents Need to Visit the Troops
« Reply #56 on: December 28, 2018, 09:23:13 »
No, I don't.

You realize that the troops in Iraq are also being criticized by the MSN (after they found out that Trump didn't distribute the MAGA hats) for breaking rules on political activity by asking Trump to sign their MAGA hats (and flags).
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline Journeyman

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 569,000
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,295
Re: Presidents Need to Visit the Troops
« Reply #57 on: December 28, 2018, 09:29:51 »
Yes, the WP, a paper bought by Amazon owner to slam Trump and the Republicans. The US MSN is insane with TDS.
Some people are capable of viewing it as a continuum  ---  yes, some people will foam at the mouth, critiquing anything and everything done by Trump, while others are worshipfully incapable of seeing anything flawed in his policies and behaviours.  I don't give much credence to either end of the spectrum.

Is the mainstream media picking on Trump?  Probably, but only if you admit that Fox & Friends et al  aren't legitimate media.  For chuckles, go to YouTube and look at some of the annual White House Correspondents' Dinners during Obama's time.  He got 'picked on' too -- some people view the role of an independent media to hold leaderships' feet to the fire -- but Obama was psychologically able to joke about it  (don't bother trying to find an equivalent video with Trump; he's never attended).

As for MSN's 'biased' reporting, on this SEAL Team 5 issue their article includes:
Quote
President Trump exposed the faces of members of U.S. Navy SEAL Team 5, possibly putting them in danger, an expert said.

AND

A retired San Diego-area SEAL officer... said the episode was "much ado about nothing.  It’s no secret that SEAL Team 5 is in Iraq," he said. "You can ask anybody in Coronado."
That seems like telling both sides of the story to me, but then, I tend to get my news from various sources and perspectives and try not to spend too much time at either unthinking end of the spectrum.



(In this instance, I personally agree with the SEAL officer's comment:  "There’s plenty of things to get upset about with Trump, and this was not one of them.")
« Last Edit: December 28, 2018, 09:32:34 by Journeyman »
It should now be obvious that running a country is NOT an entry-level job.  [Yes, it applies to both sides of our border]

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 122,345
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,635
Re: Presidents Need to Visit the Troops
« Reply #58 on: December 28, 2018, 09:36:55 »
No, I don't.

You realize that the troops in Iraq are also being criticized by the MSN (after they found out that Trump didn't distribute the MAGA hats) for breaking rules on political activity by asking Trump to sign their MAGA hats (and flags).

Ah.  Ok. Maybe re-read some of the posts here if you don't get it.  The title of the thread is also a good indicator of what we are talking about.  there is also wide spread coverage and critiques about the President not visiting troops in war zones. This is what I was referring to and the context of that discussion.  The internet and typing can also lose some things in translation I guess.

Yes about the media.  Not sure why you are bringing it up given my stance on the media in this instance.  I wasn't arguing that.  In fact I am siding with you on that.  Once again I answered your question to my initial comment with what I thought was a satisfactory answer backed up with a few facts.  I guess we are in violent agreement on that?
Optio

Online Rifleman62

    Retired.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 98,570
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,160
Re: Presidents Need to Visit the Troops
« Reply #59 on: December 28, 2018, 10:14:01 »
I was pointing out Trump has visited the troops; only once in a combat zone.
Never Congratulate Yourself In Victory, Nor Blame Your Horses In Defeat - Old Cossack Expression

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 122,345
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,635
Re: Presidents Need to Visit the Troops
« Reply #60 on: December 28, 2018, 10:16:33 »
I was pointing out Trump has visited the troops; only once in a combat zone.

Yes.  And some media outlets are scrambling to correct their coverage which was likely already written assuming he was going to miss another opportunity to visit the troops during a holiday.  Egg on their faces indeed.
Optio