Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 191

Thread: The McCrystal collection (catch all)

  1. #121
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Okinawa, Japan
    Posts
    33

    Default

    Well, the fact-checking questions may not have verified that the quotes were correct but I still have yet to read an article where anyone who was present accuses Hastings of fabricating quotes or even embellishing quotes. Sean Naylor wrote a piece about the article alleging that the most damaging quotes came from low-level individuals rather than senior staff, as the Rolling Stone article suggests, but nobody disputes that the quotes themselves were wrong: http://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/0...ystal_071210w/

    There is much hand-wringing over Hastings being 'unfair' to include quotes that were meant to be OTR. I think, as has been made clear on this thread, these staff members were naive at best to think that anything they said would be OTR.

  2. #122
    Council Member J Wolfsberger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    806

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesse9252 View Post
    ... I think, as has been made clear on this thread, these staff members were naive at best to think that anything they said would be OTR.
    Which, I think, pretty much sums it up, except for one thing. These guys were trash talking their chain of command and their counterparts in other organizations. Doing that privately, with peers, is a soldier's inalienable right. These guys did it with an outsider. The most charitable way to describe that is lousy leadership. (And I even agree with their judgments.)
    John Wolfsberger, Jr.

    An unruffled person with some useful skills.

  3. #123
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Kingston, Ontario
    Posts
    45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by J Wolfsberger View Post
    Which, I think, pretty much sums it up, except for one thing. These guys were trash talking their chain of command and their counterparts in other organizations. Doing that privately, with peers, is a soldier's inalienable right. These guys did it with an outsider. The most charitable way to describe that is lousy leadership. (And I even agree with their judgments.)
    Yeah, that goes to the heart of it. Soldiers bitch, and there are few things of more beauty than one going off on a rip where he accuses everyone from god down to his MWO of being part of a malevolent plan to make his life hell, but the guy's in Kevlar and lugging a pack in 40 degree heat. I've never reported that; I've said worse. My editors would not be pleased if they knew what I was saying about them while kitted out in body armour and bouncing around in an RG-31 or nearly being flown into a mountain on a Herc while they were in an air-conditioned office. (But I'd still say it to their face.)

    An office full of REMFs spouting off about their commanders and political superiors - repeatedly and to a reporter - is first off astonishingly dumb and secondly, tells me they don't care if it gets reported. I mean this went on for a MONTH.

    All I have to say about this is that there's a thing in communications called message discipline. These officers are not naive, uneducated individuals, they are not 20-year-old privates lugging 120lbs of gear in the field, I would be astonished to see that behaviour in the smallest rural council or professional office let alone US command in Afghanistan. I honestly do not understand it. Was there no paffo around to suggest somebody ought to stop talking now or to hold an emergency briefing about how everybody needs to STFU about 10 minutes ago?

    I absolutely do not blame the reporter. I've been in theatre, and the officers, from task force commanders on down knew exactly what they were saying, stayed on message and as a result, they didn't get fired. They stayed in their lanes, they were pros, and I have a feeling if a junior captain under that command had felt the urge to expound on government policy or the PM's parentage to me, he would be on the next plane home. This wasn't a gotcha sprung by the reporter on the general and his staff, if anything it was the opposite. I feel for that reporter looking at the mess in his notebook and wondering what he was gonna do with THIS.

  4. #124
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Kingston, Ontario
    Posts
    45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jesse9252 View Post
    Anyway, at the end of the day, it's sort of a moot point. Interacting with the media--whether one likes it or not--is a necessity in the world we live in. I think we'll get a lot further institutionally by acknowledging their presence is neither good nor bad, it's just there, like a piece of terrain or the weather. It is up to us to interact with the media in a manner that produces positive outcomes for the mission. And I think part of that means never getting trashed in Paris with a reporter...
    You just reminded me of this article that I did in my day job a while ago (apologize for the lengthy C&P, all the links are dead.) Emphasis(es) mine as they are germane to our discussion.

    Cheers

    Media message

    By IAN ELLIOT

    Capt. Jim Rees squared his shoulders yesterday morning and faced off against an opponent more implacable and cunning than the terrorists threatening the G11 summit that Canadian Forces were guarding yesterday.

    The media.

    In a conference room at the Directorate of Land Synthetic Environments, where he and more than 50 other mid-level officers were undergoing one of the most gruelling three-month training periods of their careers, Rees faced a bank of cameras, lights and reporters ostensibly representing outlets ranging from the local Halifax newspaper to CNN.

    With his colleagues left to deal with easy stuff like bomb scares, violent demonstrations and local residents angry at traffic tie-ups caused by dignitaries, he dealt with the rumours, speculation and controversies that the media could turn into that day's news.

    "Are you allowed to shoot the protesters if they get out of control?" asks one reporter, the real-life Jane Hawtin role-playing as a reporter for a national newspaper.

    The actual and former reporters hired by the company to design and staff the fake summit also float the deceptively deadly queries beloved by the working press, such as questions prefaced with, "How do you feel ... " or questions about whether frontline troops view the Sea King helicopters as flying coffins or something worse than that.

    The directing staff running the exercise evaluate Rees or watch computer screens elsewhere in the building as stories out of the news conference are published minutes later on realistic-looking news websites, just as they would be when it comes to the real thing.

    "We are trying to make this training as realistic as possible," explains Maj. Greg Poehlmann, a real-life public affairs officer for the military who offered Rees feedback on his performance at the end of the session.

    The Canadian Forces likes to talk about the complicated modern battlespace, populated not just by the enemy but by civilians, aid workers, refugees, NATO allies and other federal agencies, and the media is increasingly part of that environment.

    No longer are training exercises "Army-pure," pushing troops and equipment around a simulated red-versus-blue battlefield where problems are of only two kinds -- those a tank can drive over and those it can't.

    The exercise is one of four done annually by the Canadian Land Force Command and Staff College at Fort Frontenac, sometimes referred to as Kingston's Prison for Captains, owing to its high stone walls and the fact its residents are sent there for months at a stretch. It is the finishing school for Canada's mid-grade officers.

    They are being trained for command beyond the military trade in which they specialize, and whether that's a domestic deployment like this week's -- simulating the economic summit that will be held in Canada immediately after the 2010 Olym - pics -- or their upcoming Afghan istan exercise, handling the media is part of the job.

    "It's not the way that it used to be," agreed Col. Jamie Cade, commander of the college, "but the students that we're getting in here are sophisticated about the media, they've been on deployed operations before and they're comfortable with dealing with the media.

    "The media is part of the military's operating environment today."

    These days even the Taliban puts out its own version of news releases to sway public opinion, and dealing with the flood of information is part of any major operation for the Canadian Forces.

    "It's been interesting," said Capt. Peter Ruggiero, a logistics officer based in Germany who is on the course.

    "The course forces you to go from the company and platoon level you're used to to thinking about to the levels of of battalions and brigades, so you're going from thinking at the level of a few hundred soldiers to groups of 5,000 soldiers."

    The weeklong exercise, just one of several scenarios that will be run during the course, is accurate down to the number of F- 18s in the air, warships off the coast and protesters identified by security agencies such as the RCMP who have vowed to disrupt the summit.

    Students are graded on all aspects of their performance and how they respond when things deviate from plan.

    Their performance on the course can have a huge impact on their careers and while the directing staff don't make a point of washing classes out wholesale, it's said that not even Gen. George Patton would walk out of the course with an A.

    "You have to go beyond your speciality and work with the other elements of the combat arms to think about the bigger picture," said Capt. Josee Allard, a logistics officer who is posted with American forces in Ohio.

    "For instance, I've really learned how important intelligence is to a successful operation."

    It would have been inconceivable to see the military staging such media sessions as part of operational training even 20 years ago, when it operated on the doctrine that silence is rarely misquoted and treated the press with the same mistrust with which the press treated it.

    Even in operations such as Bosnia, there were no imbedded reporters along for the ride, and with no Internet, what was written in the local papers did not matter the way it does today, when a commander's off-the-cuff remarks can be dominating the national news cycle within hours.

    "Things are a lot different these days," said Al Morrow of Calien, the private firm that runs the exercises and strives to make them as realistic as possible, bringing in not just real reporters but former police officers, civil servants and other retired professionals to play roles.

    "This is the computer age, the information age, and anything you can do to increase the complexity and the realism of these exercises will benefit the students."

    That was even apparent at the lunch break at the base mess, where the TVs were tuned to CBC Newsworld and the story topping the program was the replacement of Brig.-Gen. Jonathan Vance as commander of Canadian Forces in Kandahar by Brig.-Gen. Daniel Menard.

    He was being interviewed by a CBC reporter beside a mud wall in Kandahar, putting into practice what he was trained on here a relatively short time ago.

    "Hey look, it's Menard," called out one of the reporters.

    "Remember him? He was on one of the last exercises we did here."
    Last edited by davidbfpo; 07-09-2010 at 10:56 PM.

  5. #125
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    25

    Default

    I think the important question that no one seems to be asking is what benefit was this article to the readers, and thus essential why was it printed? It seems to me that journalism's current failure is not so much a lack of ethics (there are certainly ethical journalists) as it is a lack of understanding of what qualifies as quality reporting and worthwhile story telling.

    McChrystal and his staff made unfortunate comments, but largely innocent in nature. Who has not maligned their bosses or coworkers after all, or used a some what of color slur in refereeing to some one or something that annoyed them. Furthermore just because McChyrstal voiced some disdain for the current administration in no way suggests he was not going to follow his orders. The biggest mistake was not the comments (as has already been pointed out) but that they were made to a reporter. Which brings me back to my previous point, many (NOT ALL) journalists seem to lack an understanding of what qualifies as quality reporting and worthwhile story telling.

    What did telling this story accomplish? Did it reveal some startling truths about the conduct of the war that must be heard by the citizens of the US? Did it uncover some dark secrets (besides that McChrystal likes to drink Bud Light Lime)? No, it did not accomplish anything of value; it turned a few off color comments into the end of, by all accounts, a fantastic soldier’s career. The article accomplished nothing else; it was journalistic drivel, not worth the paper it was printed on.

    Was this article really the most valuable information Michael Hastings gleaned from a month spent with McChrystal? I wish I could have spent a month shadowing McChrystal, the incites one could gain from such an opportunity are invaluable, shadowing anyone as successful, regardless of what they do for a living, should reveal far more then what basically amounts to interoffice gossip. Mr. Hastings learned nothing of more value to communicate to his readers? How many journalists would have reported the exact same story I wonder? Too many I think.

  6. #126
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Rocky Mtn Empire
    Posts
    473

    Default We're different

    We don't have the right to talk smack about our superiors, gov't officials, etc., etc., etc.. We gave it up when we pulled on the uniform. Wolf has it about right in the post a coupla hours ago. Many of the civilian commentators just don't get that part.

    As I recall the elements of proof for disrespect, presence of the offended person is not required and the truth of the offensive statement is irrelevant. Yes, your platoon leader is a jerk, but you still aren't allowed to verbalize it.

    One of the ironies I find in these various dust-ups involving disrespect is that many of the offenders and THEIR defenders would court martial a private in a heartbeat if he called them a "dumb MF."

  7. #127
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Near the Spiral, New Zealand.
    Posts
    134

    Default

    This 'justification' of why everyone should tread carefully around the media is exactly why there needs to be a recognized code of conduct for the media - indeed one might argue that once upon a time, an unwritten one not only existed but was respected by most people, on both sides of the discussion. Then, the media decided that they were the only ones who could save us from ourselves and in doing so, sacrificed any claim to professionalism that they once had.

    Yes, I know that it is typically only the smaller proportion of irresponsible media that we tend to note and not the larger proportion who do just get on with their jobs - but even that larger proportion has a case to answer in not policing (or really even attempting to) police their own...lawyers, accountants, doctors and other professionals all not only have codes of conduct but bodies that hold their members accountable...so do tradespeople like plumbers, carpenters and electricians (just to head of the profession versus trade argument)...

    Can you imagine a lawyer, as part of doing normal business, casually discarding lawyer-client privilege, or a doctor giving the Hippocratic Oath a miss because it wasn't convenient at the time...? This thread isn't so much about GEN McCrystal - he may or may not have brought this upon his own head - but, as per the initial post, the irresponsibility of the media in the way they have covered this story...

  8. #128
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Kingston, Ontario
    Posts
    45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SJPONeill View Post
    This 'justification' of why everyone should tread carefully around the media is exactly why there needs to be a recognized code of conduct for the media - indeed one might argue that once upon a time, an unwritten one not only existed but was respected by most people, on both sides of the discussion. Then, the media decided that they were the only ones who could save us from ourselves and in doing so, sacrificed any claim to professionalism that they once had.

    Yes, I know that it is typically only the smaller proportion of irresponsible media that we tend to note and not the larger proportion who do just get on with their jobs - but even that larger proportion has a case to answer in not policing (or really even attempting to) police their own...lawyers, accountants, doctors and other professionals all not only have codes of conduct but bodies that hold their members accountable...so do tradespeople like plumbers, carpenters and electricians (just to head of the profession versus trade argument)...

    Can you imagine a lawyer, as part of doing normal business, casually discarding lawyer-client privilege, or a doctor giving the Hippocratic Oath a miss because it wasn't convenient at the time...? This thread isn't so much about GEN McCrystal - he may or may not have brought this upon his own head - but, as per the initial post, the irresponsibility of the media in the way they have covered this story...
    There is a code of conduct for the media in Afgh that comes in the form of an embed agreement, at least for those of us north of the border www.cefcom.forces.gc.ca/pa-ap/cfmep-pjifc/cfmep-jtfa-eng.pdf, but we're not lawyers or even plumbers. There are no professional standards to get into journalism, there is no governing body. Whether that's good or bad depends on how you feel about what you read. I think I know where you stand.
    Last edited by 40below; 07-12-2010 at 07:42 AM.

  9. #129
    Council Member Kiwigrunt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Auckland New Zealand
    Posts
    467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SJPONeill View Post
    ...so do tradespeople like plumbers, carpenters and electricians (just to head of the profession versus trade argument)...
    Not in NZ…..yet…..with up to 5 % of our houses leaking and rotting.
    Nothing to do with this thread but I couldn’t resist, as my button was pushed. (No stab at you SJPONeill, but at my trade/industry.)

    Back to McChrystal…and/or the media.
    Nothing that results in human progress is achieved with unanimous consent. (Christopher Columbus)

    All great truth passes through three stages: first it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
    (Arthur Schopenhauer)

    ONWARD

  10. #130
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    18

    Cool Rolling Stone

    There seems to be consensus that Rolling Stone is not the sort of publication that COMISAF and his staff should allocate much time to. Was there a suggestion somewhere that the interview was granted on the basis that the magazine is considered 'trendy' and would reach an important audience?

    However, if RS is thought to be an inappropriate vehicle for such a serious topic as war perhaps we should reflect on the use of RS on SWJ's own homepage...?

  11. #131
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    CenTex
    Posts
    222

    Default

    I found the refernce to RS to be slightly ironic, but perhaps I missed the point.

    This is a publication that printed an article entitled "Heavy Metal Mercenary."

    It isn't The Atlantic, The New Yorker or Esquire. Although the last has also ended careers...

  12. #132
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default if St. Carl were with us...

    ...he would undoubtedly remind us that officers giving media interviews are a policy instrument, a conduct of politics (and war) by other means.

    It would seem that the General forgot that.
    They mostly come at night. Mostly.


  13. #133
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Kingston, Ontario
    Posts
    45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SethB View Post
    I found the refernce to RS to be slightly ironic, but perhaps I missed the point.

    This is a publication that printed an article entitled "Heavy Metal Mercenary."

    It isn't The Atlantic, The New Yorker or Esquire. Although the last has also ended careers...
    Just remember we're in the age of Generation Kill, which has far more influence than Fick's book, although the latter was much better. Us old farts don't realize how much war has changed (or maybe hasn't since young men became Hoplites or steppe warriors, but the psyops are more sophisticated.) I can't fault McChrystal for speaking to RS because it has a desirable audience - and the kids who are the soldiers of tomorrow are not reading the New Yorker or the Atlantic - but my god, stay on message. THAT he can be blamed for.

  14. #134
    Council Member Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    North Mountain, West Virginia
    Posts
    990

    Default Military-Media Relations

    On military-press relations, guys may want to track down the book Big Story on how the Tet offensive was covered by the media in 1968. The author Peter Braestup was a Marine in the Korean War who was the Washington Post Saigon bureau chief in 1968 when the offensive took place. The Post's foreign editor at the time had been an Army infantry officer and Japanese linguist who served in China during World War II. Neither of those guys was anti-military; in fact the Post was the last major paper in the U.S. to turn against the war on its editorial page. The book is out of print but it can be found in abridged and unabridged versions; the unabriged version was published in limited numbers so I'd recommend the abridged version. The book is an interesting study in how different people perceive the same events.

    My late dad was a reporter for the Post from 1956 until 1986. My interest in the military and service was to a great extent inspired by his time in the Army in 1943-1946. When this subject of military-press relations comes up I have mixed feelings--generally it's best avoid discussions on the subject with those who have outspoken opinions about it. From my admittedly biased perspective journalists are not as a category sleazy people who wake up every day premeditating ways of how they can do institutions and people dirty.

    I doubt that a code of conduct would have a major effect on how the media conducts its affairs--I also doubt that such a code would make the military, other institutions or individual persons any happier about how they are covered than they are now. Probably the only time the press would be "team players" would be during existential wars when national survival is at stake. By definition wars are s****y affairs so the optional ones will usually get more skeptical coverage than the World War II type of conflict when the entire nation is mobilized.

  15. #135
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi 40below,

    Quote Originally Posted by 40below View Post
    The basic rule: It's not OTR unless I say it is, and that has to be reconfirmed in every situation because sometimes the subject says stuff that invalidates the agreement. So really, nothing is OTR.
    So de facto deception is okay (i.e. letting the person assume that they are OTR)? That, BTW, is not a "trap"; I'm just trying to figure out what ground rules you are operating under.

    I appreciated both the story and the moral of the story . I also suspect that the relative difference in social function between Anthropologists and Journalists accounts for the different stance on OTR: I would assume you were OTR unless you said differently or you were saying something in a public space. BTW, we have the same dilemma with OTR material when we encounter similar information.
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  16. #136
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Kingston, Ontario
    Posts
    45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marct View Post
    Hi 40below,



    So de facto deception is okay (i.e. letting the person assume that they are OTR)? That, BTW, is not a "trap"; I'm just trying to figure out what ground rules you are operating under.

    I appreciated both the story and the moral of the story . I also suspect that the relative difference in social function between Anthropologists and Journalists accounts for the different stance on OTR: I would assume you were OTR unless you said differently or you were saying something in a public space. BTW, we have the same dilemma with OTR material when we encounter similar information.
    I've been in this miserable business for 22 years. People don't go OTR to share useful information; they do it to influence you, to vent, to express prejudices and opinions that they would never want their name attached to.

    I have never been OTR in 20 years. I may not report stuff - and there's a lot of stuff sitting in a lot of notebooks that will die with me, believe me - but I make it clear to my subjects that you don't say it to me (or around me if you understand there's a reporter in the room) if you don't want to read it.* If I have a notebook in my hand, we are on the record. My boss has told me numerous times, "I'm not paying you to make friends."

    Does it work? I've never been sued and I have never once had an issue with someone claiming that what wound up in print should not have been there, and I deal with folks with stars on their shoulders who, in my experience, are more thin-skinned about what's reported on them than high school cheerleaders.

    *I don't speak for the rest of the press.

  17. #137
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Near the Spiral, New Zealand.
    Posts
    134

    Thumbs down

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiwigrunt View Post
    Not in NZ…..yet…..with up to 5 % of our houses leaking and rotting.
    Nothing to do with this thread but I couldn’t resist, as my button was pushed. (No stab at you SJPONeill, but at my trade/industry.)
    But there is in NZ and that's why if you want the job done and done right, you always fork out a little more and go to a registered master tradesman (and check that he is in fact registered)...

    It should be the same with the media...once upon a time there were certain 'brands' that had the aura of responsibility and then there were the tabloids...now it's damn hard to tell the difference (possibly because they're all owned by the same few mega-corps?). Now you have to pretty much know each reporter personally before you trust them with anything but the time of day...I've had quite a bit to do with the media here and there are only a very few that I would trust to be relatively open with (and still within bounds of organisational ethos and messages).

    In the end it all still comes down to responsibility and while it is so easy to pile all the crap on to GEN McCrystal, the true responsibility really does lie with Michael Hastings and Rolling Stone...what have they really achieved for the national good, for the war effort (if you accept that perhaps there is a war on) or the general advance of civilisation by pulling a good man down...Sweet FA, I'd say...

  18. #138
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    97

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 40below View Post
    well, christ, as a member of the despised media, i have a suggestion, that is as applicable to the member of the local utilities board to the general in charge of afghanistan: Don't say it to a reporter if you don't want to read it later. Saves a lot of back-and-fill later. Why is this so hard?

    radical concept alert!!!!

  19. #139
    Council Member Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    North Mountain, West Virginia
    Posts
    990

    Default Col. Dandridge M. Malone on the Press

    Here's what Col. Dandridge Mike Malone said about press coverage of the Tet offensive in 1968. I first heard this in about 1982 in a folksy tape recording Col. Malone made on the Vietnam War and the Army at the time. Copies of the tape made the rounds in the Army in the early '80s and groups of officers and NCOs were sometimes assembled to listen to it.

    . . . and captured NVA with Time magazine articles . . . and the splendid victory of Tet, with hundreds of NVA lying scattered in heaps and wide rows outside Kontum, where the deadly gunships had caught them coming, uncharacteristically, across open rice paddies in broad daylight (" . . . they was all doped up and goin' to a party . . . musta been . . . crazy little bastards . . .") . . . and the victory strangely, puzzlingly, lost, somehow, somewhere, up in the air waves of the ten thousand miles between Kontum and home . . .
    A text version of the tape with some added material is available on the following link:
    http://one-six-one.fifthinfantrydivision.com/mikem.htm

  20. #140
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1

    Default

    I have served in the military for 12 years now and this is one of the most public displays of discord to date. Of course, it goes without saying that the words reported in the RS article are in violation of everything that the structure of civil military relations requires. Perhaps the larger question is why did everyone that surrounded him allow this situation to occur. Why was this reporter, with his less than favorable outlook on the wars, allowed unhindered to GEN McCrystal? Who was screening these folks; who was advising GEN McCrystal on access times and forums? It seems that there were many failures along the road to this story being published and the actual words used were just the culmination of blunders.

Similar Threads

  1. "Processing Intelligence Collection: Learning or Not?"
    By Tracker275 in forum Intelligence
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-21-2011, 12:46 AM
  2. New to S2, need FM 34-20 and collection management info
    By schmoe in forum RFIs & Members' Projects
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 02-07-2009, 11:03 PM
  3. Relationship between the political system and causes of war (questions)
    By AmericanPride in forum RFIs & Members' Projects
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: 03-30-2008, 09:16 PM
  4. Intelligence Collection and Sharing
    By SWJED in forum Intelligence
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 12-03-2007, 03:22 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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