Posted on 01/10/2007 2:30:20 PM PST by STARWISE
Unswayed by anti-war passions, President Bush will send 21,500 additional U.S. troops to Iraq and build the American presence there toward its highest level to quell worsening bloodshed. The move puts Bush on a collision course with the new Democratic Congress and runs counter to advice from some senior generals.
Set to announce his decisions in a prime-time speech Wednesday night, Bush was to acknowledge making major mistakes in Iraq, primarily failing to deploy enough U.S. soldiers and demand more Iraqi troops and cooperation to confront the country's near-anarchy.
In advance of Bush's address, White House counselor Dan Bartlett said U.S. military operations have been "handcuffed by political interference by Iraqi leadership" — but now will proceed under rules allowing troops to confront Shiite militias as well as Sunni insurgents.
(snip)
The new Democratic leaders of Congress met with Bush and complained afterward that their opposition to a buildup had been ignored. "This is the third time we are going down this path. Two times this has not worked," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. "Why are they doing this now? That question remains."
Senate and House Democrats are arranging votes urging the president not to send more troops. While lacking the force of law, the measures would compel Republicans to go on record as either bucking the president or supporting an escalation.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Carried live online by: C-span
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
An Operational Security (OPSEC) Primer
By the U.S. Department of Energy
"Even minutiae should have a place in our collection, for things of a seemingly trifling nature, when enjoined with others of a more serious cast, may lead to valuable conclusion."
— George Washington, known OPSEC practitioner
What is Operational Security (OPSEC)?
The Intelligence Puzzle
Intelligence collection and analysis is very much like assembling a picture puzzle. Intelligence collectors are fully aware of the importance of obtaining small bits of information (or "pieces" of a puzzle) from many sources and assembling them to form the overall picture.
Intelligence collectors use numerous methods and sources to develop pieces of the intelligence puzzle . . .their collection methods range from sophisticated surveillance using highly technical electronic methods to simple visual observation of activities (these activities are referred to as "indicators").
Information may be collected by monitoring radio and telephone conversations, analyzing telephone directories, financial or purchasing documents, position or "job" announcements, travel documents, blueprints or drawings, distribution lists, shipping and receiving documents, even personal information or items found in the unclassified trash.
The Premise of OPSEC
The premise of OPSEC is that the accumulation of one or more elements of sensitive/unclassified information or data could damage national security by revealing classified information.
The Goal of OPSEC
The goal of OPSEC, as a "countermeasures" program, is to deny an adversary pieces of the intelligence puzzle.
ORIGIN OF OPSEC
There is nothing new about the principles underlying OPSEC. In fact, we can trace OPSEC practices back to the colonial days and the Revolutionary War. George Washington, our first president, was a known OPSEC practitioner. General Washington was quoted as saying, "Even minutiae should have a place in our collection, for things of a seemingly trifling nature, when enjoined with others of a more serious cast, may lead to valuable conclusion."
However, OPSEC, as a methodology, originated during the Vietnam conflict when a small group of individuals were assigned the mission of finding out how the enemy was obtaining advance information on certain combat operations in Southeast Asia. This team was established by the Commander-in-Chief, Pacific, and given the code name "PURPLE DRAGON."
It became apparent to the team that although traditional security and intelligence countermeasures programs existed, reliance solely upon them was insufficient to deny critical information to the enemy--especially information and indicators relating to intentions and capabilities. The group conceived and developed the methodology of analyzing U.S. operations from an adversarial viewpoint to find out how the information was obtained.
The team then recommended corrective actions to local commanders. They were successful in what they did, and to name what they had done, they coined the term "operations security."
OPSEC and Government Activities
Over the years it became increasingly apparent that OPSEC had uses in virtually every government program that needed to protect information to ensure program effectiveness. OPSEC professionals modified and improved techniques based on experience gained with many different organizations and in areas far afield from military combat operations.
Today, OPSEC is as equally applicable to an administrative or research and development activity as it is to a combat operation. If OPSEC is not integrated into sensitive and classified activities, chances are that our adversaries will acquire significant information about our capabilities and limitations.
It probably would have been difficult for the "Purple Dragon" team to foresee that, 20 years later, the methodology they developed would become a national program.
OPSEC AT HOME
You have probably been practicing OPSEC in your personal life without knowing it! When you are getting ready to go on a trip have you ever:
Stopped the delivery of the newspaper so that they would not pile up outside and send a signal that you are not home?
Asked your neighbor to pick up your mail so the mailbox would not fill up, also indicating that you are away?
Connected your porch lights and inside lights to a timer so they would go on at preset times to make it look like someone is home?
Left a vehicle parked in the driveway?
Connected a radio to a timer so that it comes on at various times to make it sound like that someone is inside?
Well, guess what you did? You practiced OPSEC!
The critical information here is obvious - we do not want anyone to know the house is unoccupied. None of the actions (countermeasures) listed above directly conceal the fact that your residence is unoccupied. A newspaper on the lawn or driveway does not necessarily mean no one is at home. Newspapers in the yard or driveway are only an indicator to the adversary. That indicator, combined with other indicators, (no internal lights at night, mail stuffed in the mailbox, etc.) will provide the adversary with the information needed to reach a conclusion with an acceptable level of confidence. In this case, the more indicators that the adversary is able to observe, the greater the level of confidence in his/her conclusion. When you eliminate these indicators, you have a much better chance of ensuring that your home is not burglarized while you are away.
The same holds true at your place of work. We must protect our critical information and eliminate indicators available to the adversary.
""What we have here, is a failure to communicate!" "
Cool Hand Luke?
Now here is Newt pontificating. I think I am pundited out and will go to bed.
If not for the Iraq war, why did we lose the Senate and the House?
Let me get a tad clearer.
Do you realize, before you start typing, that there are military members online from Iraq, mothers, fathers, wives, children, those who have lost their sons and daughters who don't want their deaths to be in vain, injured at Walter Reed and elsewhere here?
I'm over in WSea...I was in Target when it started and when I came out there was already an inch! We have about 4 now and it's goind strong. Just been watching the speech, Fox, and the cars struggling to make it up my street.
Please send our thanks to your grandson, varina davis! Our son served in Iraq too. God bless them all and their missions!
Newt on, sid it was a strong speech
That was part of Malikis come home to Jesus moment, the other part is that Blair is out and Britain will be going home.
It's now or never....
"This one isn't. Call the crusade!"
Yep!
Thank you. What marajade doesn't seem to understand is that while she was sitting back her armchair quarterbacking the entire war...i was actually over there seeing what was going on first hand.
So she can sit here and rant about polls and Iraqi's not wanting Iraq to succeed and all of her other bullsh*t till she's blue in the face.
I know better.
You just don't get it do you?
I have confidence in them.
What's your beef?
Trust me, it's not your hearing capabilites. None of them even attempted to answer the questions. I wish I was a techno-whiz. If I was, I'd splice together segment after segment of examples like that and post them on the internet. (do they even use the word, "splice", anymore? LOL)
With all due respect to Blonde (and Bottle Blonde) FReepers.....Kirsten Powers is the epitome of every blonde joke I can recall....Holy Hannah, what an airhead!
Godfather?
Definitely not. It was a war movie.
On Maliki, I would have demanded he jettison Sadr, and get real about taking on sectarian violence in an even handed way, and get moving on cooperating in creating and deploying Iraqi troops to do it, and stop interfering with US troops movements, or I would move to partition, and effectively liquidate his government. It would have been a come to Jesus moment. Bush just isn't mean enough; he just isn't. Now Maliki is moving, because Bush is on the ropes, and he knows that time is running out. I would have made clear that time was running out many months ago. I have been unhappy with Bush on Iraq for some time, and have come out of the closet and so posted now for several months. That is my opinion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.