Some military bloggers are pissed that the Army Regulation 530-1 has been beefed up to deal with security issues related to blogging. The reg is not just about blogging. It deals with other public electronic communications like unencrypted email too.
I’m surprising myself by agreeing with the Army. “Loose lips sink ships.” Well, maybe I’m agreeing with the Navy. Whatever. It’s about Operational Security in a war zone.
My agreement is based on the difference between the military and civilian life. When you’re in the army, they own your ass. You are governed by military law, not civilian statutes. The army is not a democracy, it mandates discipline, and its regulations can look arbitrary. There is no draft, so if you’re in the army, you pretty much chose to be there (give or take the exigencies of family tradition, patriotism, duty, honor, class, poverty, race, and other limits to opportunity or ethical concerns in civilian life that might force the choice). When you’re there you follow army regulations. All that said, there is some powerful discussion about why milblogs are better than no milblogs at the Army Times and at Wired News. Some other good links on the subject include
Dadmanly’s coverage of the milblogging conference that ended today.
Ana Marie Cox’s post.
The Army’s response, via Andi.
{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }
Scruggs 05.06.07 at 1:15
Frank, I think it would be better left to the individuals’ judgment, any (plausibly valid) contractual obligations to the military notwithstanding. Your argument is honest and takes note of many important issues, concerns which I share, but also I think it’s important for them to be able to do whatever they feel is needed to keep their humanity in tough conditions. Whatever security concerns there might conceivably be are close to moot, given the deranged brain trust running the horror show. On top of all that, this war was immoral, unjust and viciously planned, from the start, and I can make a case that harm to the soldiers is a feature, not a bug. They will be coming home to further shafting.
Frank Paynter 05.06.07 at 7:23
Quite the conundrum we have here Mr. Scruggs. If our army was fighting against Hitler, rather than in his proxy’s service, it would be easier to support monolithic and repressive policies including a “leave the laptops home” mandate. If they were coming home to a college education, a good job, a house in the suburbs with a washer-dryer in the basement and a lifetime supply of scented Proctor and Gamble personal hygiene products it would be easier to ask them to sacrifice their freedom of expression while in the service of their country.
Undoubtedly modern day Captains Queeg and Bligh will find repressive ways to apply the regulation no matter what the army claims to intend by it.
I could make an argument that ALL war is “immoral, unjust, and viciously planned” and I think we want to stay away from doing harm to the soldiers. They are us.
Bottom line, this reg seems to be an attempt to codify common sense. It’s better not to tell your enemy your location, your strengths, your weaknesses, your plans. Blogs are risky in this regard.
madame l. 05.06.07 at 12:48
Dr. WeimaranerThey are us.
in this regard.
Brian 05.06.07 at 3:47
When you’re there you follow army regulations.
Brian 05.06.07 at 3:48
When you’re there you follow army regulations.
Agreed. But the regulation as interpreted is dumb.
Yes, operational security (OPSEC) is a really good idea but a) it’s already illegal to run your mouth about this stuff and b) you can more easily monitor OPSEC on blogs than, say, a bar outside the main gate.
So, there, done. You can catch the guy violating OPSEC. Lecture the rest of your grunts ‘don’t do that’ and you’re set.
Why This Is a Bad Idea
I hate the moniker ‘Information Warfare’. It simply assigns a name to stuff we’ve already been doing - using technology to make our grunts faster and more lethal. Knowing more about the bad guys than they would believe you could know. Being able to shoot Iraqi tanks (1991) from further away than they can see you let along engage you with outdated Soviet technology. Eventually the survivors get the point and all you have to do is blow up one tank and the rest of the unit gets out and surrenders.
The battle is - and has been for a long time now - decided not by the Generals but the Lieutenants and Corporals and PFCs on the ground. Those guys use blogs to blast information across the nets - * what worked in the ambush last week? what didn’t* *PFC Schmuck used an R/C car to nudge a box and it blew up - we didn’t have to wait for an EOD team. Hey that’s a GOOD idea - we’ll use that tomorrow.*
We shouldn’t BAN this stuff we should enable the guys on the ground to use as much of it as they can handle. Which they’re already doing - or were doing. Don’t impose a requirement on the CO to review his troops blogs - holy crap the Captain has enough to do without that additional burden - we should give each squad a laptop and a login to WordPress.com.
We’re good at inventing technology, letting the Japanese figure out how to mass produce it, and then hacking the results.
Blogs - or really the process they represent - are what we’re GOOD at. Yes the Black Hats can use the results - but we can use the same tech to move faster and better.
Worried about OPSEC? Fine. It’s the Black Hats that should worry. Our high-speed low-drag rifle squads will be breaking down their doors while they’re still digesting the reports from last week’s blog entries.
Brian 05.06.07 at 7:21
I’ve re-read the order and the letter from the Army. I stand by what I said but I take back some of the attitude with which it was written.