Results 1 to 26 of 26

Thread: Military Policy in the 21st Century

  1. #1

    Default Military Policy in the 21st Century

    Specifically drone attacks. Wraith had a thread about a US targeted kill list, including US citizens abroad who were deemed "terrorists" or terrorist sympathizers. This is an extension of that, after new information.

    The DoJ released a white paper trying to explain/justify the use of drones to target and kill "terrorists", but it left many more questions than it answered.

    The executive branch doesn't want the judicial branch deciding national security policy, but the judicial branch doesn't want to be the arbiter of national security policy.

    So...what does this mean moving forward in the 21st century dominated by new technology?

  2. #2
    It wasn't released, it was leaked. Also, it's unclear how much the white paper reflects current policy. Lastly, it was a DoJ white paper because they were asked to render an opinion, in conjunction with White House and Pentagon lawyers. The actual decisions are most definitely made by the executive.

  3. #3
    Leaked or released doesn't matter much in the broader context. If we're a nation of laws, then due process shouldn't be abused -- or bypassed -- by any other branch of government, including the executive.

    Technology moves faster than legislation. But that's a lame excuse for avoiding the inevitable need to combine national security, military defense, technology, and democratic ideals with comprehensive and transparent policies.

  4. #4
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    I think it does matter...who are you, Hillary?
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  5. #5
    Unless I missed it, I'm not sure we've actually had a big discussion about drone use here. Sort of surprising given the potential controversy value.

    Though I'm not sure there is really a vocally anti-drone faction lurking about...

  6. #6
    Drones - why put a person in harm's way unless you need to?

    Anyone who is opposed to drones just because they are drones are either just opposed to all forms of war (ie they want the world to roll over to terrorists, communists and fascists) or they dislike how they are being used. Being against drones just because they are drones is just stupid.

  7. #7
    We've discussed targeted assassinations, Dread - this is just a special case.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by GGT View Post
    So...what does this mean moving forward in the 21st century dominated by new technology?
    In the middle of 19th century a legal gap in the Meiji constitution of Japan allowed the military to take control of civil power. They started a series of military adventures under a military government, as civil government was mostly a puppet, merely decoration. In the beginnings of 1930s a faction of the army known as the Kwantung army which was loyal to Tojo conducted a self-attack in a train in Manchuria to justify an attack on the chinese, but later it was uncovered and it was a bit embarassing. Some ministers opposed war, so Kwantung army killed them. Emperor lost all his allies and he remained a puppet during the whole war.

    Press that did not align to government policies was shutdown. Sometimes when something "offended" thje military an employee blamed himself to save coworker jobs and they were beaten and jailed. They were called "jail editors". There was no press that could criticize the government. Japanese were told about victories, and when victories were no more, they were told stories of heroic actions. They realized they were losing when allies bombed Saipan. "What? Weren't we winning the war?" many people asked themselves.

    Foreign press was banned. The only place where you could find it and read it was in the toilets, where you'd use it as toilet paper. This is why they called foreign press as "toilet paper".

    After the raid on Tokio, the emperor wanted to stop the war, and slowly he started to find allies so he could make the tape to broadcast a radio message to make people to surrender. The military were so stubborn about keep fighting, but the emperor was convinced that allies would exterminate the last Japanese if required.

    So after one century of the legal gap, it ended up with 100 years of military adventures and an embarassing defeat that sank the population into totalitarism, despair and misery.

    In the case of Hitler, he had his own army, which would later be called the SS. That bothered the german military, so Hitler reached an agreement, so if military appointed him as commander in chief of the military, he would abolish this army. He didn't, and the SS got its name later. After the fire in the Reichstag in 1934 union leaders were blamed and they were the first civilians to go to concentration camps in Germany.

    In US separatism may have a chance, under the disguise of survivalists towns...

    Citadel: Survivalists build city-fortress with mandatory weapon ownership
    http://rt.com/usa/news/survivalists-...-fortress-600/

    Quote Originally Posted by GGT View Post
    Technology moves faster than legislation. But that's a lame excuse for avoiding the inevitable need to combine national security, military defense, technology, and democratic ideals with comprehensive and transparent policies.
    War and military affairs are usually not transparent, not accountable, in almost every nation of the planet. Finding transparent policies is like finding transparent oil or transparent chocolate.
    Freedom - When people learn to embrace criticism about politicians, since politicians are just employees like you and me.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Veldan Rath View Post
    I think it does matter...who are you, Hillary?
    huh?

    This is not just about drones, though that's part and parcel. As far as policy goes....this "Global War on Terrorism" has the potential to be so vague and encompassing, that we'll be in perpetual war, without borders. Targeting individuals or cells anywhere and everywhere. Is it just against Al Qaida or any other terrorist group?

    Is the CIA or Pentagon making these decisions? Are the departments collaborating, and apprising congress with facts, so they can provide checks and balances? It's a delicate balance to keep certain state secrets classified, for our own national security....but we also have the right to know if there's so much secrecy it causes distrust.

    Remember all that 'great' intelligence, sometimes using enhanced interrogation techniques about those WMD that led to the Iraq War?

  10. #10
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    You asked what does it matter if the info was released or leaked. That is a big difference. That means the most transparent administration EVAR might not be as such.

    But, I'm somewhat in your camp on this drone issue (trying to keep the discussion somewhat limited so we don't dance ALL over the place), in that using them on US Citizens who are NOT an IMMINENT threat without due process makes me nervous. Who IS making these decisions? Can they be held accountable when they get it wrong? When there is collateral damage (civilians that have nothing to do with suspected terrorist get harmed/killed) will said decision maker be brought up on charges? I doubt it.

    Also: We were using waterboarding to get us into GWII? You have a source for that? It's news to me...(but I readily admit I just may not have heard of it)
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  11. #11
    My reply to wiggin was meant to address where we are now, and that's a very complicated, complex, and delicate situation.

    I didn't understand the Hillary aside at first, but I'm guessing you meant her senate testimony on Benghazi (when she declared, "Why does it matter now if it was a planned attack or just a few guys who took a walk and decided to kill some Americans?") Emphasis on the word now. The main point is figuring out why it happened, as a way to prevent embassy/consulate attacks in the future. I agree with her on that. I took that as meaning the State Dept, Defense Dept, Dept of Justice, CIA and congress need to work together.

    edit: We didn't have legal definitions of torture that included water-boarding, until after the GW Bush Administration....

  12. #12
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    You do realize that what she said and figuring out why it happened kinda contradict each other?

    WRT to your edit...you danced around the point. Did we water-board to get us into GWII? (if it was called torture or not?)
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Veldan Rath View Post
    You do realize that what she said and figuring out why it happened kinda contradict each other?
    Not necessarily. Not in the context of the Senate hearings at least, which were full of politicized questions, asked by members with a personal agenda. *cough McCain*

    WRT to your edit...you danced around the point. Did we water-board to get us into GWII? (if it was called torture or not?)
    Hey, I'm not the one dancing around crucial ethical or legal standards. But we do have info (with images) that certainly appeared to use torture, marines pissing on dead bodies, testimony about water-boarding by both victims and perpetrators. Gitmo non-withstanding, it's now known that water-boarding WAS used as an interrogation technique.

    Morally and ethically, we have to decide how to create a 21st century National Security, and our DEFENSE, without trampling on Civil Rights/Human Rights, and/or giving too much leeway to one branch of government without checks and balances....or turning our Defense into Offense.

  14. #14
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    One last time. Yes or no. Did we water-board people to get s into GWII? As in, we said there was WMD, and that was based upon us getting that info via water-boarding.

    You said: Remember all that 'great' intelligence, sometimes using enhanced interrogation techniques about those WMD that led to the Iraq War?
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  15. #15
    Yes, the US engaged in enhanced information gathering techniques (water-boarding) post 9/11. But that's not a comprehensive display of our other "Intelligence Gathering", or its validity....or how it guided our our military policy.

  16. #16
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    Can you source that?
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  17. #17
    Source what? Don't we already know that CIA, Homeland Security, State Dept. and DoD aren't coordinating very well? Or that policy oversight (and funding) by congress has gaps?

  18. #18
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    Source
    using
    waterboarding
    to
    get us
    into
    Gulf War II
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  19. #19
    Yes, we used water-boarding during the Bush Administration. Only after senate hearings was it policy to include water-boarding in the definition of torture. But 'intelligence gathering' was used to justify those EITs, even though it did not lead to definitive proof that WMD existed. That circular argument isn't mine, ya know.

  20. #20
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    6,435
    Still, no source? It's no secret waterboarding was used, but I'm not sure it lead to GWII.

  21. #21
    Ditto. The WMD argument was based on old intelligence and self-serving information given by Iraqi exiles (e.g. Chalabi).
    Hope is the denial of reality

  22. #22
    I'm only suggesting that "Intelligence", in general, is a mixed bag.

    The public only knows what's been de-classified, and assumes congressional oversight committees are privy to classified information. Congress assumes the CIA, Pentagon, DoJ and State Depts. are coordinating their efforts, and providing the information needed to fulfill their legal duty. Checks and balances. Seems to me there are too many assumptions being made within, and among, the branches of our government.

    I don't know if it's an organizational/structural problem, or to what extent it's political. But I do know we got dragged into a ten-year war with Iraq based on false 'intelligence' that entangled politicians, politics, and policy.

  23. #23
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    You said: Remember all that 'great' intelligence, sometimes using enhanced interrogation techniques about those WMD that led to the Iraq War?

    The bolded part I have been asking you to back up. All the other stuff you have been going on about, is NOT what I have been asking for you to source.
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  24. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Veldan Rath View Post
    You said: Remember all that 'great' intelligence, sometimes using enhanced interrogation techniques about those WMD that led to the Iraq War?

    The bolded part I have been asking you to back up. All the other stuff you have been going on about, is NOT what I have been asking for you to source.
    Oh, now I see what you were asking! Commas are important syntax tools.

    I didn't mean that EIT (water-boarding) led to good intelligence about WMD....but that false intelligence, or re-packaged intelligence, led us into the Iraq War.

    Sorry, my bad. I was including/insinuating recent senate confirmation hearings for new cabinet nominees, and the questions asked by politicians about the Iraq troop surge, the Benghazi consulate, use of drones, etc....and how that fit into policy and legal ramifications moving forward.

  25. #25
    Ar81: You know, of course, that a number of things are different now. Mainly, that the free flow of information is much more widely available and difficult to block. I'm sure if you asked most Chinese about Tienanmen Square they would know more information about it than your average American or European.

    Theory turns into reality awfully fast, though.

  26. #26
    That is how the military work. You do not plan to take out the entire opposing force, but put up a network of targets ranking from their power within the regime. These are often leaders, very aware of being particularly targeted and hence defended cautiously. A drone attack can, with its stealth and computer precision, avoid having to fight through these barriers of defences and put your side at no risk other than material loss. War is gruesome, and there is hardly anything such as killing "cowardly", as long as the target is labeled an enemy.
    Tomorrow is like an empty canvas that extends endlessly, what should I sketch on it?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •