1

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« Last post by Lord Dave on April 01, 2025, 04:41:39 PM »

Apparently RFK Jr doesn't want to prevent AIDS.
https://apnews.com/article/health-human-services-layoffs-restructuring-rfk-jr-ec4d7731695e4204970c7eab953b2289

A friend of mine works with the NIH as part of their job.  Whole departments are now gone.  INCLUDING the HIV/AIDS prevention department.

2

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« Last post by Lord Dave on April 01, 2025, 09:26:06 AM »

No, they don't.  The houthies know that they are targets.  If they get 2 hours notice that jets are coming their way, they they have time to prepare a welcome.

They've already tried. They don't have the technology.

This is part of your problem Tom, you just can't help thinking like an American.  They have technology, but they don't need technology. 

Try and put yourself in the Terrorist's sandals.  You visit your girlfriend "at the usual time" of 15.00.  Iranian Republican Guards email/phone/send-a messenger on a scooter to you.  They have intercepted a message: "Planes are airborne, he's at his girlfriend's house". 

What do you do?  Launch some SAMs? 

Or maybe just put on her burkha, get in your Mercedes and drive like Bin Laden.

Bonus points if you can get your local population to think America just blew up an occupied apartment building for no reason, killing 53 men, women, and children.  And they didn't even hit their target.

3

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« Last post by DuncanDoenitz on April 01, 2025, 09:07:24 AM »

No, they don't.  The houthies know that they are targets.  If they get 2 hours notice that jets are coming their way, they they have time to prepare a welcome.

They've already tried. They don't have the technology.

This is part of your problem Tom, you just can't help thinking like an American.  They have technology, but they don't need technology. 

Try and put yourself in the Terrorist's sandals.  You visit your girlfriend "at the usual time" of 15.00.  Iranian Republican Guards email/phone/send-a messenger on a scooter to you.  They have intercepted a message: "Planes are airborne, he's at his girlfriend's house". 

What do you do?  Launch some SAMs? 

Or maybe just put on her burkha, get in your Mercedes and drive like Bin Laden. 

4

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« Last post by AATW on April 01, 2025, 08:22:38 AM »

It's wild you think a journalist’s inclusion matters

Everyone thinks that it matters.
Waltz has said he takes full responsibility and has admitted it was embarrassing. There's an investigation going on in to how it happened.
If if doesn't matter then what is he taking responsibility for? Why is it embarrassing? Why does it need investigating?

The only person who doesn't think it matters is you - and you're clearly just trolling. There's is no world, no matter what shape it is, in which you think the accidental inclusion of a journalist into a group chat about a live military operation is fine. Whether what the journalist saw was classified or harmful to the operation isn't actually that relevant. It's the lack of seriousness and basic competence that he got invited in there and no-one noticed. That's the issue you are desperately trying to avoid and pretend you think is fine.
It isn't fine. You know it isn't fine.

The journalist might as well have been included in your weekly catch-up with your therapist.

I'm British, mate. We don't have therapists, we talk to our friends. You should try it.

5

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« Last post by Tom Bishop on April 01, 2025, 03:33:05 AM »

No, they don't.  The houthies know that they are targets.  If they get 2 hours notice that jets are coming their way, they they have time to prepare a welcome.

They've already tried. They don't have the technology.



Notice the immense amount of information given about US aircraft in this video. Capabilities which the panicky princesses of this controversy would say is too much, breaking their "you can't say anything!" rules. But the US is so much more advanced compared to most of its adversaries that this information is ineffective.

Tom, did you miss the part where they didn't realize that an unauthorized journalist was included in the chat?  They weren't declassifying information for public release.  They were discussing an ongoing military air strike against an enemy that has air defenses on personal devices that may or may not have been hacked by our adversaries.  Top government and military personnel have secure government issued devices for a reason.

He was talking to a group of 18 people in that chat room. Any one of them could have been blackmailed, hacked, or a spy. If he had something candid and sensitive to say about specific classified plan or technology, it would likely have been communicated to someone specific, not blasted out to the community. This is further evidence that it was meant to act as normal unclassified operational information.

6

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« Last post by markjo on April 01, 2025, 02:40:45 AM »

It’s one thing to say that we’re deploying troops to an area.  It’s quite another to say that the planes are taking off right now and bombs should be dropping in 2 hours.   I don’t understand why you can’t see the difference.

Both an announcement that you are deploying troops to an area and that you are sending out planes to an unspecified target have some amount of hypothetical risk.

No, they don't.  The houthies know that they are targets.  If they get 2 hours notice that jets are coming their way, they they have time to prepare a welcome.

However, the Secretary isn't a random officer spilling secrets. They have access to classified intel and a team of advisors on the response capabilities of the enemy, and they are trusted to judge what to share and when. If they do say something like, "Planes are taking off now" in an unclassified medium, it's not an accident. It is because they've decided the benefit of disclosure to the audience outweighs the risk.

Tom, did you miss the part where they didn't realize that an unauthorized journalist was included in the chat?  They weren't declassifying information for public release.  They were discussing an ongoing military air strike against an enemy that has air defenses on personal devices that may or may not have been hacked by our adversaries.  Top government and military personnel have secure government issued devices for a reason.

Maybe this will explain the situation more clearly:

7

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« Last post by Tom Bishop on April 01, 2025, 12:14:33 AM »

I honestly don't think it matters if they were talking about the weather (which they were at one point, come to think of it), surely people at that level should be pretty careful in who they're saying things to. This incident shows a complete lack of competence and seriousness at the very top level of US government.

It's wild you think a journalist’s inclusion matters when the chat was unclassified and had zero actionable intel. No actionable secrets were divulged. The journalist might as well have been included in your weekly catch-up with your therapist. No real substance, and no bombshells.

It’s one thing to say that we’re deploying troops to an area.  It’s quite another to say that the planes are taking off right now and bombs should be dropping in 2 hours.   I don’t understand why you can’t see the difference.

Both an announcement that you are deploying troops to an area and that you are sending out planes to an unspecified target have some amount of hypothetical risk. However, the Secretary isn't a random officer spilling secrets. They have access to classified intel and a team of advisors on the response capabilities of the enemy, and they are trusted to judge what to share and when. If they do say something like, "Planes are taking off now" in an unclassified medium, it's not an accident. It is because they've decided the benefit of disclosure to the audience outweighs the risk. Like with the example of announcing that troops are being deployed to an area, the Defense Secretary judged that the enemy had little capability to know what was being targeted and how to counter it.

Tom, rule number one of operational security is that you don’t talk about ongoing operations on an unsecure platform with people who are not authorized to have that information.

The rules for classification puts the decision to classify in the hands of the person with the classification powers, who in this case is the Secretary of Defense. There isn't a "no one talks about anything, even if you are second in command of the military" rule. I have already posted the rules for you here:

I already know the rules, and they aren't difficult to look up. See the bolded in the following from the Department of Defense Handbook for Writing Security Classification Guidance:

https://sgp.fas.org/library/quist2/app_c.html

The Department of Defense (DoD) provides guidance in classifying military operations information. The following information is taken from DoD's Department of Defense Handbook for Writing Security Classification Guidance. 5

While there are no hard and fast rules for classification of military operations information, and while each Military Service and command may require a unique approach to operations security (OPSEC), there are basic concepts which can be applied. What must be protected are operational concepts and their applications, and the capabilities, vulnerabilities, and weaknesses of the plan. The element of surprise is essential to military effectiveness in both tactical and strategic operations, and requires the continuous concealment of capabilities and intentions. OPSEC is the principal means of achieving that concealment.*, 6
* Operations security is the "process of denying adversaries information about friendly capabilities and intentions by identifying, controlling, and protecting indicators associated with planning and conducting military operations and other activities" [U.S. Department of Defense, Department of Defense Handbook for Writing Security Classification Guidance, DoD 5200.1-H, U.S. 5-3(d), March 1986].

Military operations information is defined for the purpose of this Handbook as information pertaining to a strategic or tactical military action, including training, movement of troops and equipment, supplies, and other information vital to the success of any battle or campaign. 7

Successful battle operations depend largely upon our ability to assess correctly the capability and intention of enemy forces at each stage of the battle and to communicate an effective battle doctrine throughout our forces. [To this might be added "and to keep the enemy from knowing, in advance, our capabilities and intentions during the battle."] Classifiable information would include:

a. The number, type, location, and strengths of opposing units.
b. The capabilities and vulnerabilities of weapons in enemy hands, and how he normally applies the weapon.
c. The morale and physical condition of the enemy force.8

Information related to operational plans (whether executed or not, presented in whole or in part) that if disclosed could be expected to cause damage to the United States, must be protected.8

In considering classification guidance for operations, there may be good reason to classify more information about the operation in the beginning than will be necessary later. Certain elements of information such as troop movements may no longer require protection after a certain date or event. When this point is reached, downgrading or even declassification should be considered.8

A classification guide should clearly identify the elements of information pertaining to the operational plan for which classification guidance is required. Classification shall continue only so long as unauthorized disclosure would result in damage to the national security, which may be an indefinite period of time in the case of unexecuted long range plans.9

Example items to be considered for classification include the following:10
- overall operational plans;
- system operational deployment or employment;
- initial operational capability date;
- planned location of operational units;
- equipage dates, readiness dates, and operational employment dates;
- total personnel requirements for total operational force;
- coordinates of selected operational sites;
- specific operational performance data that relate to the effectiveness of the control of forces and data on specific vulnerabilities and weaknesses;
- existing operational security and communications security procedures, projections, and techniques; and
- target characteristics.

From the bolded above we learn:

1. There are no hard rules for classification. It is essentially an opinionated matter, presumably for someone with classification powers

2. The only must there is that it must not be "expected" to cause harm to the United States. The word expected makes this another opinionated matter. The SecDef stated that the he did not expect the limited information he provided to cause harm.

3. There are various items we can "consider" for classification, meaning that not all elements are automatically classified

Those are the rules. They are not difficult to find. This is going to be a nothingburger for the Secretary of Defense. I don't know why you guys are pretending that the rules are only available in the heads of the likes of honk or garygreen for random accusations against high ranking officials, because they are clearly available for us.

8

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Does Anime Attack on Titan represents the real world?

« Last post by Crudblud on March 31, 2025, 10:28:51 PM »

Most anime is real. Attack on Titan is less real than Azumanga Daioh but still fairly real. The most real anime is Space Battleship Yamato.

9

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Terrible Political Memes

« Last post by AATW on March 31, 2025, 08:55:46 PM »

10

Arts & Entertainment / Does Anime Attack on Titan represents the real world?

« Last post by 1984resident on March 31, 2025, 08:46:35 PM »

The Japanese animation “Attack on Titan”describes a world surrounded by walls.

Outside the walls there are high-standard civilization and the residents inside the walls are capitulated and suppressed.

These poor residents are forbid from learning the history before the wall,and anyone who show interest to the world outside could be targeted.

If the theory of flat earth is true, then everything what the modern science tells us could be concocted, and people do not realize they’re trapped in stereotypes.

Thanks to Elon Musk and X platform, more and more individuals are standing up and to explore the truth themselves, and alone with  these Silicon Valley giants turning conservative,  more and more information could be displayed online.

Sometimes I have the idea that sth horrible and cruel is ruling the world, I can’t describe what it really is but there’s sth exist.

Hopefully the emancipation is not so far.